Poll: Wonder Woman was not a good movie in any way

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Feb 9, 2012
17,696
1,934
118
It was alright. I forget what I gave it. Probably a 7/10. Most superhero movies get ballparked around that.
 

Silentpony_v1legacy

Alleged Feather-Rustler
Jun 5, 2013
6,760
0
0
Samtemdo8 said:
Silentpony said:
The thing I didn't like about the movie is it was supposed to be an origin story for the callous, bitter, 4chan loving Wonder woman we got in BvS that turned her back on humanity for 80 years until Bruce told her to grow a pair and start doing what she was literally created to do.

Good. Great.

Then why didn't they give her any good reason to be so callous? Like sure, she fought in WW1. Once. Only once. And no friends died in a charge across no-mans's land. She didn't lead a do or die charge where 10,000 men died to just take a trench line 5 feet away. She didn't order the bombardment of a town with mustard gas.
She saw one town get killed, and the dude she fucked died and...and that's it. I mean for fucks sake, Aries was actually real! What a let down!

What should have happened is she becomes a leader for the allied forces, fights across The Somme and Argon, sees hundreds of thousands of young men and women die for small gains, takes pity on German forces before her friends brutally gun them down 'cause WAR, then finally get to the man she thinks is the God of War, kills him and boom. Still 2 more years of War left.
She learns that no, there is no God of War, man is determined to kill themselves, and everything she was taught as an Amazon is wrong.
There. That's the origin story for a bitter, callous Wonder Woman.
Not the dick withdrawal we saw.

4chan loving?
Total channer. Just goes around posting dank memes about WW1 to be edgy.
 

Natemans

New member
Apr 5, 2017
681
0
0
Samtemdo8 said:
I agree in the sense that I thought this movie was way to safe and average.

And yet this is what people wants DC heroes to be because "that is how they are in the comics and that is how Marvel is doing it right :p"
Yet this film tried to be more conveyed and layered to its main character along with making her likable instead of a one dimensional psychopath, try to have color or tackle themes in a meaningful way.
 

Mad World

Member
Legacy
Sep 18, 2009
795
0
1
Country
Canada
Wow! Just looked at Rotten Tomatoes and I see over 90 percent for both critics and audience reviewers. I'm gonna go ahead and claim that something's not quite right there (paid reviewers and fake user comments). It's not horrible, but it's definitely not amazing; fairly cliched. Then again, look at the scores for The Fate of the Furious... a very average movie. The fact that they have eight of these is retarded. I used to say, "Well, it's just dumb fun." However, the Fast and Furious movies are just getting too ridiculous to be doing this well. They're the Call of Duty of movies.
 

Epyc Wynn

Disobey unethical rules.
Mar 1, 2012
340
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
It was alright. I forget what I gave it. Probably a 7/10. Most superhero movies get ballparked around that.
Not to blindly attack how you rate things, but the average for any genre should come out as a 5/10 except in cases where the genre itself is so bad the rating must be lowered. If you give a movie a 5.1 or above out of 10, you are automatically saying it is better than 50% of all modern movies. With that in mind, I rated Wonder Woman a 1.5 out of 4.

Mad World said:
Wow! Just looked at Rotten Tomatoes and I see over 90 percent for both critics and audience reviewers. I'm gonna go ahead and claim that something's not quite right there (paid reviewers and fake user comments). It's not horrible, but it's definitely not amazing; fairly cliched. Then again, look at the scores for The Fate of the Furious... a very average movie. The fact that they have eight of these is retarded. I used to say, "Well, it's just dumb fun." However, the Fast and Furious movies are just getting too ridiculous to be doing this well. They're the Call of Duty of movies.
Yeah, it did disturb me the numbers were that high too. I understand room for difference in opinion, but difference in opinion doesn't justify giving this movie an average 92% critical rating in addition to an average 90% audience rating. I'm not saying MovieGate, but I am saying people should be going into that website with both eyes open from now on in case say... they're fudging the numbers for money.
 

COMaestro

Vae Victis!
May 24, 2010
739
0
0
Mad World said:
Wow! Just looked at Rotten Tomatoes and I see over 90 percent for both critics and audience reviewers. I'm gonna go ahead and claim that something's not quite right there (paid reviewers and fake user comments). It's not horrible, but it's definitely not amazing; fairly cliched. Then again, look at the scores for The Fate of the Furious... a very average movie. The fact that they have eight of these is retarded. I used to say, "Well, it's just dumb fun." However, the Fast and Furious movies are just getting too ridiculous to be doing this well. They're the Call of Duty of movies.
OMFG! First, DC films are rated poorly on Rotten Tomatoes and I see claims that Marvel/Disney are obviously paying off the critics to review DC movies poorly, and the Marvel fans are just downvoting them. Now we get one DC film that is really highly rated and obviously it's because DC/WB paid off the critics and all the DC fans are making fake comments!? Serious-fucking-ly?

I enjoyed WW a lot! I thought the actors all did a great job, I DID find plenty of scenes memorable, most of the decisions made by the characters were logical or at least made some semblance of sense (unlike most of them in the other DC films), and it just WORKED. I admit I may be rating it a bit higher than I should because it is just so much better than the other DC drek we have been given of late, so it seems even better than it actually is in comparison, but it was still a good movie.
 

Mad World

Member
Legacy
Sep 18, 2009
795
0
1
Country
Canada
COMaestro said:
OMFG! First, DC films are rated poorly on Rotten Tomatoes and I see claims that Marvel/Disney are obviously paying off the critics to review DC movies poorly, and the Marvel fans are just downvoting them. Now we get one DC film that is really highly rated and obviously it's because DC/WB paid off the critics and all the DC fans are making fake comments!? Serious-fucking-ly?

I enjoyed WW a lot! I thought the actors all did a great job, I DID find plenty of scenes memorable, most of the decisions made by the characters were logical or at least made some semblance of sense (unlike most of them in the other DC films), and it just WORKED. I admit I may be rating it a bit higher than I should because it is just so much better than the other DC drek we have been given of late, so it seems even better than it actually is in comparison, but it was still a good movie.
Chill pill, bro. I'm not up to date with all of the conspiracy theories; never heard of that one. Anyway, I enjoyed the movie; I just do not think that those high ratings are warranted. Nothing special about the movie. No better or worse than any other of the many, many superhero movies out now.
 

DrownedAmmet

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2015
683
0
21
Epyc Wynn said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
It was alright. I forget what I gave it. Probably a 7/10. Most superhero movies get ballparked around that.
Not to blindly attack how you rate things, but the average for any genre should come out as a 5/10 except in cases where the genre itself is so bad the rating must be lowered. If you give a movie a 5.1 or above out of 10, you are automatically saying it is better than 50% of all modern movies. With that in mind, I rated Wonder Woman a 1.5 out of 4.

Mad World said:
Wow! Just looked at Rotten Tomatoes and I see over 90 percent for both critics and audience reviewers. I'm gonna go ahead and claim that something's not quite right there (paid reviewers and fake user comments). It's not horrible, but it's definitely not amazing; fairly cliched. Then again, look at the scores for The Fate of the Furious... a very average movie. The fact that they have eight of these is retarded. I used to say, "Well, it's just dumb fun." However, the Fast and Furious movies are just getting too ridiculous to be doing this well. They're the Call of Duty of movies.
Yeah, it did disturb me the numbers were that high too. I understand room for difference in opinion, but difference in opinion doesn't justify giving this movie an average 92% critical rating in addition to an average 90% audience rating. I'm not saying MovieGate, but I am saying people should be going into that website with both eyes open from now on in case say... they're fudging the numbers for money.
I think you have a very poor idea of what a rating system should be. I don't think a movie should be compared to its genre, giving a shitty movie a higher score because it's better than other shitty movies of the same ilk is stupid. If superhero movies are just that good according to a reviewer, why can't they all get above a 7 out of ten?

I don't agree with the whole sliding scale thing, the better system should rely on how much the reviewer enjoyed the film.

For myself I'd give Wonder Woman about an 8/10. Yeah it was a slightly worse version of the first Captain America movie, but it was still a good movie
 

Epyc Wynn

Disobey unethical rules.
Mar 1, 2012
340
0
0
DrownedAmmet said:
I think you have a very poor idea of what a rating system should be. I don't think a movie should be compared to its genre, giving a shitty movie a higher score because it's better than other shitty movies of the same ilk is stupid. If superhero movies are just that good according to a reviewer, why can't they all get above a 7 out of ten?

I don't agree with the whole sliding scale thing, the better system should rely on how much the reviewer enjoyed the film.

For myself I'd give Wonder Woman about an 8/10. Yeah it was a slightly worse version of the first Captain America movie, but it was still a good movie
"Yeah it was a slightly worse version of the first Captain America movie-" and if you ended the sentence there that would be some quality criticism. No need to hold yourself back with the unfitting 8/10 and the "but it was still a good movie".

Ironically when you read all the posts in this thread you think "wow that movie was overrated" but when you look at the poll, people are rating this movie a 4/4 more than any other rating. I hope people are aware that playing softball with the ratings leads to people wasting their money. If your words are scathing, then the numbers should reflect that.
 

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
Epyc Wynn said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
It was alright. I forget what I gave it. Probably a 7/10. Most superhero movies get ballparked around that.
Not to blindly attack how you rate things, but the average for any genre should come out as a 5/10 except in cases where the genre itself is so bad the rating must be lowered. If you give a movie a 5.1 or above out of 10, you are automatically saying it is better than 50% of all modern movies. With that in mind, I rated Wonder Woman a 1.5 out of 4.

Mad World said:
Wow! Just looked at Rotten Tomatoes and I see over 90 percent for both critics and audience reviewers. I'm gonna go ahead and claim that something's not quite right there (paid reviewers and fake user comments). It's not horrible, but it's definitely not amazing; fairly cliched. Then again, look at the scores for The Fate of the Furious... a very average movie. The fact that they have eight of these is retarded. I used to say, "Well, it's just dumb fun." However, the Fast and Furious movies are just getting too ridiculous to be doing this well. They're the Call of Duty of movies.
Yeah, it did disturb me the numbers were that high too. I understand room for difference in opinion, but difference in opinion doesn't justify giving this movie an average 92% critical rating in addition to an average 90% audience rating. I'm not saying MovieGate, but I am saying people should be going into that website with both eyes open from now on in case say... they're fudging the numbers for money.
You have some issues understanding rotten tomatoes' rating. It is not a score, it is an aggregation. 90% is not that it is 10 points away from being perfect, or that it is better than a 89% movie, it means 9 out of 10 people thought it was a decent movie (not great, not flawless... decent as opposed to a bad movie).

A movie that is safe, agreeable and entertaining (Civil War: 90%, Doctor Strange: 90%, Finding Dory: 94%, Kung Fu Panda: 87%), although bland, is generally better rated than a divisive, possibly superior movie (The Revenant: 80%, War Horse: 76%, The Help: 75%, The Wolf of Wall Street: 77%, Munich: 78%)... that is not about politics, bribes or some corrupt IT guy, it is the definition of "divisive".
 

DrownedAmmet

Senior Member
Apr 13, 2015
683
0
21
Epyc Wynn said:
DrownedAmmet said:
I think you have a very poor idea of what a rating system should be. I don't think a movie should be compared to its genre, giving a shitty movie a higher score because it's better than other shitty movies of the same ilk is stupid. If superhero movies are just that good according to a reviewer, why can't they all get above a 7 out of ten?

I don't agree with the whole sliding scale thing, the better system should rely on how much the reviewer enjoyed the film.

For myself I'd give Wonder Woman about an 8/10. Yeah it was a slightly worse version of the first Captain America movie, but it was still a good movie
"Yeah it was a slightly worse version of the first Captain America movie-" and if you ended the sentence there that would be some quality criticism. No need to hold yourself back with the unfitting 8/10 and the "but it was still a good movie".

Ironically when you read all the posts in this thread you think "wow that movie was overrated" but when you look at the poll, people are rating this movie a 4/4 more than any other rating. I hope people are aware that playing softball with the ratings leads to people wasting their money. If your words are scathing, then the numbers should reflect that.
if someone never saw the first Captain America movie (if that type of monster exists) then that criticism is useless without the score
 

Far Star

New member
Jul 23, 2017
5
0
0
It was good. I don't know how I would put it numerically. About on par with the first Captain America movie I would say. I do think people are overlay generous because it's the first female lead superhero movie that wasn't ass. That however is a good problem to have.
 

Epyc Wynn

Disobey unethical rules.
Mar 1, 2012
340
0
0
Far Star said:
It was good. I don't know how I would put it numerically. About on par with the first Captain America movie I would say. I do think people are overlay generous because it's the first female lead superhero movie that wasn't ass. That however is a good problem to have.
Well, I guess this thread was due for the "something something female lead" argument. The movie was ass and the female lead had no character development. Anyone here remember a point where they were like "wow Wonder Woman's character was just taken to a whole new level" because I don't.
 

Tsun Tzu

Feuer! Sperrfeuer! Los!
Legacy
Jul 19, 2010
1,620
81
33
Country
Free-Dom
I felt that the contrast between comic booky amazon blocking bullets with her gauntlets to a vaguely eastern sounding rock tune and a...surprisingly somber take on WWI, clashed really badly.

Like, she's killing German soldiers and all I can think is, "That's just some guy who wants to go home...Nazis aren't a thing yet."

It was jarring.

At least in Captain America it was a nakedly nefarious, over the top occult organization within Hitler's regime with a funky name (Hail Hydra!), led by a dude with a fuckin' literal red skull for a face, that kept it firmly in the realm of fiction.

And the slow motion was bleh.

The movie even ends on a weird slow motiony thing where she's jumping at the camera like it's the 80s or somethin'.

The villain reveal was dumb too...why the fuck did Ares keep the weird British mustache?

And he apparently had it from the beginning! As a greek diety! Why!?

But...solid average film. Wasn't bad. Wasn't good. Firmly average.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
8,734
1,734
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Epyc Wynn said:
The movie was ass and the female lead had no character development. Anyone here remember a point where they were like "wow Wonder Woman's character was just taken to a whole new level" because I don't.
Her entire arc is based around coming to understand the moral greys of the world. That people are quite capable of doing terrible things to each other and don't need external influence to do that, but that in of itself doesn't condemn them. At the end of the day, it's still worth fighting for the good in the world and in humanity, in a world that is obviously not as black and white as she first thought.

It's a character arc that's been done a thousand times in a thousand stories, but it's a character arc nonetheless.

LostGryphon said:
Like, she's killing German soldiers and all I can think is, "That's just some guy who wants to go home...Nazis aren't a thing yet."

It was jarring.

At least in Captain America it was a nakedly nefarious, over the top occult organization within Hitler's regime with a funky name (Hail Hydra!), led by a dude with a fuckin' literal red skull for a face, that kept it firmly in the realm of fiction.
I get what you're saying, but the film does pull out the stops to show the moral ambiguities of WWI - there's plenty of amoral Allied generals, the German generals bar Ludendorf are shown to have concern for their men, and there's a sense of relief in the German soldiers once Ares is defeated.

Honestly, I prefer it to Hydra. If Hydra in the film had remained allied with the Nazis I might have bought their villany, but no, Hydra's plan is "take over the world." Newsflash, taking over the world isn't an end, it's a means, but I have no idea what their motivation for it is. I also don't know why the history books fail to mention that WWII had laser guns and whatnot. I might have been able to buy it if the film went all in and established itself as full-fledged alternate history, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

LostGryphon said:
And the slow motion was bleh.
Agree there.

LostGryphon said:
And he apparently had it from the beginning! As a greek diety! Why!?
http://hercules-xena.wikia.com/wiki/Ares

Someone watched Hercules and/or Xena. ;p
 

Gordon_4_v1legacy

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,577
0
0
I personally really enjoyed it (seen it four times) but it isn't perfect, like the losing of faith should have happened in Act 2 - like maybe move the ball forward and let her kill Luddendorf there and then have Veld bombed anyway under a major's orders or something. As for Ares, well the stache doesn't bug me but I agree it feels like the movie was going one way then takes a sudden turn without really needing too: a better subversion might have been an Ares who is trying to genuinely rein the warfare in but every effort he makes is thwarted by his very presence just making something in everyone's head tick just so. And instead of Diana defeating him, he lets her kill him because he's tired of this shit.

Mind the big thing that stuck out to me is that based on what happened once her full divine powers were unlocked (for lack of a better word) then she should have been able to kick Doomsday's teeth out through his asshole in BvS.

I did like her "moral" so to speak in that she can't make people be good: that's up to us and no hero can defeat free will but she can stand in the way of those who would do wrong.
 

Epyc Wynn

Disobey unethical rules.
Mar 1, 2012
340
0
0
Again, why are you people bashing the movie but not giving corresponding ratings in the polls? More than 33% of you have given a perfect score to this wretchedly boring 1.5 star film.