Forums - Movies Discussion - Birds of Prey - 82% RT, and good audience reception

COKTOE said:
SuaveSocialist said:
Awesome! But DC still needs to release two more Certified Fresh movies consecutively before I give them another chance.

Rotten Tomatoes seems to be flying pretty fast and loose with the term "certified". To me, especially lately, they seem like a dog that I wouldn't trust to lick it's own asshole.

I had no idea.  Then it's settled: DC owes me three consecutive movies that are Certified Fresh and rated 80% or higher on the tomatometer.  

Birds of Prey is on the razor's edge; I'll have to make sure it hasn't fallen below that threshold when Wonder Woman is released.



Around the Network
SuaveSocialist said:
COKTOE said:

Rotten Tomatoes seems to be flying pretty fast and loose with the term "certified". To me, especially lately, they seem like a dog that I wouldn't trust to lick it's own asshole.

I had no idea.  Then it's settled: DC owes me three consecutive movies that are Certified Fresh and rated 80% or higher on the tomatometer.  

Birds of Prey is on the razor's edge; I'll have to make sure it hasn't fallen below that threshold when Wonder Woman is released.

Screw reviewers judge movies by asking people who have similar tastes as you. 



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

SuaveSocialist said:
COKTOE said:

Rotten Tomatoes seems to be flying pretty fast and loose with the term "certified". To me, especially lately, they seem like a dog that I wouldn't trust to lick it's own asshole.

I had no idea.  Then it's settled: DC owes me three consecutive movies that are Certified Fresh and rated 80% or higher on the tomatometer.  

Birds of Prey is on the razor's edge; I'll have to make sure it hasn't fallen below that threshold when Wonder Woman is released.

Screw reviewers judge movies by asking people who have similar tastes as you. 



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

It will be interesting to see if it can at least break even. It most likely needs ~$240M-$250M to do so. So far, it's not off to a very good start.



Eagle367 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

I had no idea.  Then it's settled: DC owes me three consecutive movies that are Certified Fresh and rated 80% or higher on the tomatometer.  

Birds of Prey is on the razor's edge; I'll have to make sure it hasn't fallen below that threshold when Wonder Woman is released.

Screw reviewers judge movies by asking people who have similar tastes as you. 

DC lost that privilege with Phase 1 of the Snyderverse.  Until they redeem themselves with consistent critical acclaim, I have no time for them.



Around the Network
SuaveSocialist said:
Eagle367 said:

Screw reviewers judge movies by asking people who have similar tastes as you. 

DC lost that privilege with Phase 1 of the Snyderverse.  Until they redeem themselves with consistent critical acclaim, I have no time for them.

That's a really strange metric mate. I mean wonder woman, aquaman, Shazam, joker and now Birds of prey have all been any where from decent to classic. None have been bad. So you didn't watch joker because of this metric as well?



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Welp, they changed the name of the movie to Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey. Seems they realized they goofed by marketing the movie as a teamup instead of a Harley Quinn movie.

Personally, I'm disappointed we didn't actually get a Birds of Prey movie straight up instead of using it as a Harley Quinn vehicle. Black Canary, Huntress, and Cassandra Cain deserve so much better than to play second fiddle.  Though I would have liked to start up with a basic Black Canary/Oracle origin.

Should have just had Harley team up with Poison Ivy instead. It's only worked like every time it's been tried since the 90s.



Eagle367 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

DC lost that privilege with Phase 1 of the Snyderverse.  Until they redeem themselves with consistent critical acclaim, I have no time for them.

That's a really strange metric mate. I mean wonder woman, aquaman, Shazam, joker and now Birds of prey have all been any where from decent to classic. None have been bad. So you didn't watch joker because of this metric as well?

My coworkers and I are all in the same boat as him. We all skipped joker due to how bad DC films have been in the past. Also, WW and Aquaman are the best DCEU films.... however, they were still boring and dull. Shazam was just bad.



Jaicee said:
shikamaru317 said:

And again, you judge me, saying that I’m a certain type. You might have been in arguments with somebody else here on VGC, but it sure as shoot wasn’t me, so please stop labeling me and lumping me in with others.

For your information, I’m no more a fan of Gary Stu’s than I am of Mary Sue’s. Bad writing is bad writing, designing a character with too many unearned strengths and few or no weaknesses is bad writing. As a writer myself, I will always call our bad writing. Good writing is building up a character over time, showing their struggles as they overcome them, so that the readers/viewers can relate to them, not building some all-powerful character whom everything comes easy to without them having to work at it.

Perhaps in the future try not to judge or label others quite so readily based on a few sentences over the internet. This will be my last response to this, I usually avoid discussions about this sort of thing but you called me out for some reason or other.

This will be my final reply on this subject as well because I'm tired of having this same conversation on every film-related thread.

The "some reason" for which I called you out was because you dedicated a whole response to complaining about the existence of what you called "girl power" movies, which I couldn't help but feel had sexist undertones because the people who write like that are usually the same ones who have also spent the last decade or so participating in misogynistic online activist movements like #GamerGate, #StarWarsFans, etc. Maybe, maybe I have lumped you in with those sorts of scenes incorrectly based on preferred lingo and convenient, typical selection of film highlights...but if so, you can forgive me for reaching that conclusion given the tone and context of the post in question, no?

I think the real problem is that Hollywood itself kinda just sucks at writing women.  If you happen to read women authors in any abundance, you'll probably find Hollywood's attempt at modernizing women to be ham-fisted and patronizing.

Also, the funny thing is that the trolls and people with legit concerns will often say the same thing.  It's not like the trolls' beliefs will automatically be wrong in its entirety.  Where they become toxic is by taking to too far and going to war at the drop of a hat.  Like you did here actually.  Yes, the defenders can be toxic too, doing things such as, say, automatically boxing a person into a hated group.  Do you think you've gained more converts to your side, or trolls by doing so?



Eagle367 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

DC lost that privilege with Phase 1 of the Snyderverse.  Until they redeem themselves with consistent critical acclaim, I have no time for them.

That's a really strange metric mate. I mean wonder woman, aquaman, Shazam, joker and now Birds of prey have all been any where from decent to classic. None have been bad. So you didn't watch joker because of this metric as well?

It may seem strange, but it's the metric DC earned.  Had Phase 1 crapped out four unwatchable insults against the artistic medium of cinema, they'd owe me four consecutive critical hits.  And until they redeem themselves, they run the risk of raising my standards if another certifiably Rotten movie is added to their body of work. 

Wonder Woman was indeed a great movie.  I'm glad to have seen it before Justice League convinced me to put DC on probation.  Didn't watch Aquaman.  Didn't watch Shazam.  Didn't watch Joker.  Didn't watch Birds of Prey.  Won't watch Wonder Woman 1984.  Won't watch The Batman. If DC resets the clock (again), I'll keep giving their movies a hard pass.  

Their individual quality, be it real or imagined by yourself, is unimportant.