Superman 2025 Movie - worst ever!

[Sal1950]

This guy is the definition of media illiteracy (lets not got started on his thinly veiled racism, homophobia and misogyny).

Yep, all the really literate guys read comic books. LOL
Your welcome to your opinion but since the movie is still getting hugely positive audience reviews you probably wouldn't make profitable movies.

 

[Bleib]

This guy is the definition of media illiteracy (lets not got started on his thinly veiled racism, homophobia and misogyny). [critical drinker]

I still cringe a bit when I remember him complaining that everyone is basically selfcentered egotistical monsters only to have him say just a second later that here is HIS version on how this movie should have been done. He sometimes has some valid criticism obviously but his target audience tends to be a bit backwards.

I tend to prefer the Pitch Meeting channel

 

[tmtomh]

Good point. Back in '79, approaching strangers with a strong negative rant about a movie (let alone one based on comic books) would probably peg you as a religious nut or mental basket case, and it would be hard to say which.

Now for some reason it's normal for adults to have strong feelings about this stuff. Maybe just because we're accustomed to basket cases constantly bubbling up to the surface on this swamp of wretchedness we call social media.

What happened to saying "get a life" and ignoring this kind of bizarre commentary?

This raises a very good point: so many critical comments of modern films and TV shows are based on the claim that everything is so dumbed-down now - and yet those critical comments are themselves often great examples of critiques that would not be taken seriously in a media-literate discussion of the merits and demerits of the film or TV show in question. In short, these "reviews" are as lame, or lamer, than the media they are reviewing.

This guy is the definition of media illiteracy (lets not got started on his thinly veiled racism, homophobia and misogyny).

Thank you! The Critical Drinker on YT is such hot garbage - if you watch one or two of his videos it's obvious he's a good writer and has a keen eye for plot and storylines. But if you watch more than one or two it becomes equally obvious that beneath that veneer, he's a one-trick pony and IMHO not especially bright or insightful. His videos are all basically a sophisticated version of the people who like to spot continuity errors and complain about implausible things based on real-life physics and a literal interpretation of fictional worlds.

A great example in his Superman review is his critique of Luthor's roomful of monkeys typing bad things about Superman on social media. He critiques it based on the fact that a roomful of humans in an offshored call center would be cheaper and make more sense. This is quite telling IMHO - he's not saying it's implausible (since chimps can't type social media comments), but rather than it's impractical and inefficient - it's the kind of critique that an idiot who's trying to sound smart would make. It's obviously a joke, the chimps being a symbolic representation of the dumbed-down mob mentality of our social media culture. It's especially clever IMHO because aside from the obvious satire of making the sh*t-posters into chimps, there's the less explicit logical conclusion of that, which is that we humans have become so weak-minded and suggestible that we can be swayed by the ramblings of chimps. It's genius. And Critical Drinker is... not.

 

[Koeitje]

Yep, all the really literate guys read comic books. LOL
Your welcome to your opinion but since the movie is still getting hugely positive audience reviews you probably wouldn't make profitable movies.

That's not the definition of media literacy.

I don't know why you are making it some kind of gotcha that the movie is getting good reviews? From what I've read the reasons for that are exactly why I would like it. When it comes to being a superhero, Superman has been more about the hero part than the super part for quite a while now. The defining character trait of Superman is not his immense strength, but his unwavering moral compass and trying to what is right. Some of Superman's best stories are the ones where he loses his powers. In addition it also shows in those comics where we have an "evil" Superman. Those don't make any significant changes to his powers, because its not his powers that make him an interesting character.

They didn't show this in the trailer for nothing. This is what Superman does, not what happened in Man of Steel. Hell, even without powers he would have tried to save the girl.

I still cringe a bit when I remember him complaining that everyone is basically selfcentered egotistical monsters only to have him say just a second later that here is HIS version on how this movie should have been done. He sometimes has some valid criticism obviously but his target audience tends to be a bit backwards.

I tend to prefer the Pitch Meeting channel

I just watch RLM and a lot of essay channels (things like Thomas Flight).

Thank you! The Critical Drinker on YT is such hot garbage - if you watch one or two of his videos it's obvious he's a good writer and has a keen eye for plot and storylines.

I don't know about his books (they seem very formulaic, but I haven't read them). I did see his short movie/proof of concept based on his books and it was utter garbage.

 

[Bleib]

I just watch RLM and a lot of essay channels (things like Thomas Flight).

I wish they made more Plinkett reviews.

Mauler is another reviewer that has done great stuff on say Game of Thrones but there's no way I'd watch a 2 hour review of a movie that is about the same length. *Checks channel* oh wait.. Almost 6 hour review of Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania. Yeah hell no. It's another popcorn movie, nothing about it is important.

​

 

[Koeitje]

I wish they made more Plinkett reviews

The odd thing is that I don't really like those, but I do like the rest.

 

[Andysu]

This raises a very good point: so many critical comments of modern films and TV shows are based on the claim that everything is so dumbed-down now - and yet those critical comments are themselves often great examples of critiques that would not be taken seriously in a media-literate discussion of the merits and demerits of the film or TV show in question. In short, these "reviews" are as lame, or lamer, than the media they are reviewing.



Thank you! The Critical Drinker on YT is such hot garbage - if you watch one or two of his videos it's obvious he's a good writer and has a keen eye for plot and storylines. But if you watch more than one or two it becomes equally obvious that beneath that veneer, he's a one-trick pony and IMHO not especially bright or insightful. His videos are all basically a sophisticated version of the people who like to spot continuity errors and complain about implausible things based on real-life physics and a literal interpretation of fictional worlds.

A great example in his Superman review is his critique of Luthor's roomful of monkeys typing bad things about Superman on social media. He critiques it based on the fact that a roomful of humans in an offshored call center would be cheaper and make more sense. This is quite telling IMHO - he's not saying it's implausible (since chimps can't type social media comments), but rather than it's impractical and inefficient - it's the kind of critique that an idiot who's trying to sound smart would make. It's obviously a joke, the chimps being a symbolic representation of the dumbed-down mob mentality of our social media culture. It's especially clever IMHO because aside from the obvious satire of making the sh*t-posters into chimps, there's the less explicit logical conclusion of that, which is that we humans have become so weak-minded and suggestible that we can be swayed by the ramblings of chimps. It's genius. And Critical Drinker is... not.

more like , critically sober , unless he's on the video himself legit with a drink and totally piss drunk to point where paramedics would have to wheel him off to hospital , otherwise i don't watch so overrated , oh subscribe and pay $£ money to join

 

[mhardy6647]

This raises a very good point: so many critical comments of modern films and TV shows are based on the claim that everything is so dumbed-down now - and yet those critical comments are themselves often great examples of critiques that would not be taken seriously in a media-literate discussion of the merits and demerits of the film or TV show in question. In short, these "reviews" are as lame, or lamer, than the media they are reviewing.

speaking of entertaining movies...

 

[krabapple]

A hero that is invulnerable (except for one neat trick with kryptonite) is kinda boring.

The writers for Supes went through various crises about this across his long comics career.

 

[krabapple]

How many times can they warm over this same, tired crap?

The 1978 film wasn't great but at least it had a bit of charm in the writing and performances.

They aren't able to do that today because the talent just isn't there anymore.

Really? What talent isn't there anymore?

 

[Sal1950]

The defining character trait of Superman is not his immense strength, but his unwavering moral compass and trying to what is right.

Really, To me it was because he could fly.

 

[Mart68]

Really? What talent isn't there anymore?

Writing, acting, directing.

 

[Koeitje]

Writing, acting, directing.

Haha, you are funny.

Really, To me it was because he could fly.

Just like his strength, flight isn't the aspect that makes Superman stand out. But I can see how you would have been drawn to that as a kid.

 

[Mart68]

Haha, you are funny.

I take it you're familiar with cinema prior to the last 30 years or so?

If so how can you say that standards are still as good when you go back and watch classics like 'Chinatown' or 'The Maltese Falcon'?

They couldn't get those scripts made today. The only reason they churn out this superhero schlock is because investors feel secure that at least they won't lose money even if they don't make much. That trough will dry up eventually too, just like it did with westerns.

 

[Sal1950]

If so how can you say that standards are still as good when you go back and watch classics like 'Chinatown' or 'The Maltese Falcon'?
They couldn't get those scripts made today. The only reason they churn out this superhero schlock is because investors feel secure that at least they won't lose money even if they don't make much. That trough will dry up eventually too, just like it did with westerns.

Well times are forever changing, those movies were good, so was Frank Sinatra, Tommy Dorsey, and Glen Miller.
But you can't - couldn't sell any of that today.

 

[Mart68]

Well times are forever changing, those movies were good, so was Frank Sinatra, Tommy Dorsey, and Glen Miller.
But you can't - couldn't sell any of that today.

Maybe not - but where's the modern equivalent in terms of quality? It just isn't there.

A lot of junk got made in the past, I know. But used to be almost every year there would be at least one great film. So far the 21st century has totally failed to deliver.

 

[kemmler3D]

I take it you're familiar with cinema prior to the last 30 years or so?

If so how can you say that standards are still as good when you go back and watch classics like 'Chinatown' or 'The Maltese Falcon'?

They couldn't get those scripts made today. The only reason they churn out this superhero schlock is because investors feel secure that at least they won't lose money even if they don't make much. That trough will dry up eventually too, just like it did with westerns.

I'm not sure what it proves that you personally don't think movies superseding two of the best movies ever made haven't been made since 1995. The truth is there has always been a lot of schlock but there's also a lot of good art being made, now as always.

100 Best Movies of the 21st Century

From 'Moonlight' to 'Parasite,' super-long documentaries to superhero epics — our picks for the greatest movies of the past 25 years.

www.rollingstone.com

Can we say conclusively that nothing on this list or anything that ought to be on this list but isn't, deserves to be mentioned among the great films ever made? I really don't think so.

The existence and popularity of bad stuff doesn't have direct implications on the existence of good stuff, in film or anything else.

 

[Mart68]

I'm not sure what it proves that you personally don't think movies superseding two of the best movies ever made haven't been made since 1995. .

It doesn't 'prove' anything. We're in the realm of art, not science here.

It's my opinion - but I'm not the only person to hold that opinion.

 

[Oddball]

I wish they made more Plinkett reviews.

Mauler is another reviewer that has done great stuff on say Game of Thrones but there's no way I'd watch a 2 hour review of a movie that is about the same length. *Checks channel* oh wait.. Almost 6 hour review of Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania. Yeah hell no. It's another popcorn movie, nothing about it is important.

​

Did not watch the Game of Thrones review nor I will, because I have my own view of it - 10/10. But if he managed to review 8 seasons in 2 hours that sounds pretty efficient.

Back to Superman - yeah pretty sad story overall so far. I guess we humans just don't really understand his character so comes out pretty shallow in his solo movies.

 

[kemmler3D]

It doesn't 'prove' anything. We're in the realm of art, not science here.

It's my opinion - but I'm not the only person to hold that opinion.

Heat is a better movie than Chinatown, prove me wrong