Water Bottle

Unpinned but featured.

Unpinned but featured.

Unlikely. Generally critics and film scholars (professors) go hand-in-hand. I went to film school and I don't think we looked at a single film that got a negative RT score.

CJohn's meltdown is making me look into getting an emoticon limit per post.

That's a great way to get a 72-hour suspension!

There are some "twists" in there that are nowhere to be found in that trailer. But they tend to be more character-based.

The biggest sequel of the year, duh. Barbershop: The Next Cut. Also that's the weekend Jungle Book comes out.

Telling you that the trailer didn't ruin 10 Cloverfield Lane for you....is doing what to you?

The 10 Cloverfield Lane spoilers are more like spoiling that Han Solo uses Chewbacca's crossbow in TFA.

Except those are actually important spoilers.

Neither of which are that terribly important to most of the film. You could easily cut them out.

I'm being honest. Having seen the film, I don't consider that trailer to have any major spoilers.

They had problems translating the screenplay they had into the big screen because the screenplay they had wasn't good.

Even Pixar has Cars 2. Even Steven Spielberg has 1941.

Eh, relax. They didn't spoil anything important.

Most of the problems in the movie are script problems. I mean there are some editing and pacing issues, sure, and there is a good story hidden in the movie....but part of the problem with BvS is a lousy script.

I can't tell if you are trying to disagree with me? Yeah, there's plenty of facets to WB's business. It's why it's a billion-dollar subsidiary in a multi-billion dollar conglomerate.

I am saying you guys are doing a good job at trying to keep it somewhat civilized on here. It seems the movie is drawing a unique severity of negativity on this forum. All I am saying that there is justification for users to be negative on this forum towards this movie and imo it is all not trolling or pointless nonsense. I didn't like BvS. Doesn't mean I'm going to change facts or root against it. I'm happy there are people who think BVS is a great movie that delivers for them. Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Question is: is it enough? This and Fantastic Beasts was supposed to be the holy grail saving WB from two consecutively poor years under Tsujiwara. WB posted $12 billion in revenue in 2015. After operating costs, WB was left with more than $1 billion in profit. This and Suicide Squad and even Fantastic Beasts could have flopped and WB would be fine.

This movie is going to make a profit? WB must be hella pissed they can't get away with not paying royalties under the excuse that the movie didn't make a profit. Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

He didn't review cinematic technique, sure, but he did review screenwriting technique. I mean, it would be hilariously ironic, except your own posts are unnecessary long, convoluted, and making also meaningless points. So I guess that's irony squared? Anyways, yeah his review is his opinion. That's what a review is and in fact the best criticism pieces aren't impartial. It's an opinion piece and once again, it's a pretty valid one. You can feel free to disagree but considering how all you've done is try to discredit his opinion (hence why you try to claim he doesn't have a technical breakdown of the film's storytelling, which he does, but it's a rant), I take it you can't actually piece together a defense of the film.

Not true? It can be hard sometimes to tell which ideas are good on paper and which ideas are good to execute but...people do sometimes know when they are following bad ideas. They just don't have the power to stop it.

Yeah. Also the execs with bad creative ideas think they are good creative ideas. They too want to make good films.

"and that weird one in 1966."