Eternals | Marvel Studios | Nov 5 2021 | Magnum-Opus by Oscar winner Chloe Zhao - Marvel's first rotten movie | Dips into the 40s on RT, B CinemaScore

[BoxOfficeZ]

9 minutes ago, exomassey said:

Don’t worry. The first wave always lean positive as most of them attended the premiere.

 

Are you implying that influencers and critics who are given free seats at premieres might not be completely unbiased? 😉

 

If you are a critic you would be tiptoeing carefully around Disney for instance because bad reviews might cost you a nice premiere seat at say a future Star Wars or MCU movie. 

[charlie Jatinder]

Tried comparing reviews of BW, SC, V2 and Eternals.

Eternals - 29/41 (71%)
SC - 23/23 (100%)
BW - 18/23 (79%)

Venom 2 - 8/14 (57%)

 

40% of Eternal reviewers didn't review the other two. (now that I am typing, I think I should have just considered those who reviewed all 3 films and not the one which reviewed ET as base).

 

Those who reviewed the other two, led to pretty much final score of two. So I guess ET may stay here as well. I will try to filter the reviews on basis of those who have reviewed all 3 in some time.

 

Edited October 25, 2021 by charlie Jatinder

[Legion Again]

2 minutes ago, charlie Jatinder said:

Tried comparing reviews of BW, SC and Eternals.

Eternals - 29/41 (71%)
SC - 23/25 (92%)
BW - 21/26 (81%)

 

40% of Eternal reviewers didn't review the other two. (now that I am typing, I think I should have just considered those who reviewed all 3 films and not the one which reviewed ET as base).

 

Those who reviewed the other two, led to pretty much final score of two. So I guess ET may stay here as well. I will try to filter the reviews on basis of those who have reviewed all 3 in some time.

 

Smart. Amusingly close match there.

[exomassey]

11 minutes ago, BoxOfficeZ said:

 

Are you implying that influencers and critics who are given free seats at premieres might not be completely unbiased? 😉

 

If you are a critic you would be tiptoeing carefully around Disney for instance because bad reviews might cost you a nice premiere seat at say a future Star Wars or MCU movie. 

I’m not trying to start a conspiracy or anything lol. 

 

If I attended a star studded premiere I would probably have a rose tinted view of any film not just Disney films. 

 

It just seems that this Marvel and Zhao collaboration didn’t really click with critics unfortunately.

 

[Valonqar]

18 minutes ago, BoxOfficeZ said:

 

Are you implying that influencers and critics who are given free seats at premieres might not be completely unbiased? 😉

 

If you are a critic you would be tiptoeing carefully around Disney for instance because bad reviews might cost you a nice premiere seat at say a future Star Wars or MCU movie. 

 

To be fair, critics are inclined to be more polite to director's slump right after the career highlight. They go off on repeat offenders but when someone they hold in high esteem doesn't deliver they tend to pull punches. For example, a good number thought that Us script was complete nonsense and bit more than it could chew. But reviews were still highly positive cause they focused on the good - terrific performances and GOAT editing in fight/dance scene. So instead of trashing Peele's wring, they highlighted Lupita, the cast, editor, score. You can work around it if a movie gives you enough material.  Jackson's King Kong came on the heels of ROTK clean sweep, but went down in history as King Long and a poster for unnecessary bloat. Yet it was given a critical pass on Naomi Watt's soulful performance and state of the art SFX. But after that, credit wore off so The Lovely Bones and The Hobbit trilogy didn't get away. 

 

I'm saying that, while critics certainly want to be invited, as you and Scott Menzel say, they do pause and think what to say if a director who previously scored awards has delivered a turkey or close. 

[Ipickthiswhiterose]

14 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

 

To be fair, critics are inclined to be more polite to director's slump right after the career highlight. They go off on repeat offenders but when someone they hold in high esteem doesn't deliver they tend to pull punches. For example, a good number thought that Us script was complete nonsense and bit more than it could chew. But reviews were still highly positive cause they focused on the good - terrific performances and GOAT editing in fight/dance scene. So instead of trashing Peele's wring, they highlighted Lupita, the cast, editor, score. You can work around it if a movie gives you enough material.  Jackson's King Kong came on the heels of ROTK clean sweep, but went down in history as King Long and a poster for unnecessary bloat. Yet it was given a critical pass on Naomi Watt's soulful performance and state of the art SFX. But after that, credit wore off so The Lovely Bones and The Hobbit trilogy didn't get away. 

 

I'm saying that, while critics certainly want to be invited, as you and Scott Menzel say, they do pause and think what to say if a director who previously scored awards has delivered a turkey or close. 

 

 

These are really good examples (Us and King Kong) of critics pulling punches. I'd add It:Chapter Two and Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark got bizarrely generous reviews for the horror genre - It Chapter Two because of the first, and SSTTITD due to nostalgia for the books.

 

But I think that other dynamics can happen as well that lead to different forms of slight groupthink in the other direction. Horror's the obvious one, which is why the outliers above are so distinct. From the late 90s to late 00s horror films couldn't buy a good review for love nor money unless it was a pre-existing IP or pretended to straddle another genre.

 

Biggest example I can think of though for harshly reviewed movies was Waterworld. I don't love the movie by any means but there's no doubt that anyone there at the time could confirm that there was blood in the water (no pun intended) and pencils being sharpened desperate to pummel Costner for some reason: something about the one-two punch of Dances with Wolves and Robin Hood's overwhelming successes had REALLY gotten to people. It was going to be framed as a bomb no matter what.

 

I'd also say that Warcraft and Nutcracker: Four Realms are two movies in recent years where I got the flavour of "We actually think this movie is better than we're saying, but it's sort of the common consensus it's terrible, we don't think it's *amazing* and it's clearly not going to do well so the safe thing is to pan it" from many reviews.

 

As for Eternals itself, no idea. I suspected it was going to be the most divisive of the recent MCU movies but it's still hard to see how it's going to fall in terms of general audiences. I think it's healthy to challenge expectations and templates, but not sure that's what this will be - especially if it's as plot heavy as is being implied. That said, I hope there aren't going to be people who have moaned about the MCU being cookie cutter that then NOW complain it's doing something else. But.....yeah, it's a lot of characters to introduce and it is certainly possible critics are holding back from saying what they really think in one or both directions.

Edited October 25, 2021 by Ipickthiswhiterose

[Valonqar]

@Ipickthiswhiterose Great points and amen to It Chapter 2 reviews. The movie was a chore. Overlong, boring, not scary, choppy, etc just didn't come together on any level and even performances were uneven. Hader and Skarsgaard were good. The rest barely had anything to do but look bug eyed. But it got a pass not to drag the really good Chapter 1 down. 

[exomassey]

I think after Endgame, which felt like an ending, the MCU is sort of in a weird place. I think a lot of the good will they once had is sort of disappearing.
 

Even on Twitter, I feel like I see viral tweets all the time saying all MCU movies are grey, not real movies or they are all the same. Marvel is military propaganda. Marvel is the worst thing to happen to cinema.

Now with them releasing more content than ever with varying degrees of quality, the MCU is just sort of losing what made it special.

 

 

Edited October 25, 2021 by exomassey

[Hatebox]

4 hours ago, Spidey Freak said:

 

Didn't a lady who try for the BW job say that Marvel told her she needed to direct only the emotional/talky scenes and the action sequences would be handled by someone else? So it's not like they are compromising after hiring. They are hiring under the assumption that women can't direct action.

 

Having said that, these are such community made movies that I don't know if even the male directors (other than a few exceptions like Gunn, Waititi and Coogler) have a lot of say on every element of their film. Jon Watts literally being hired again and again for being a "team player".

 

To be honest I've always found MCU action scenes to be mostly shite. For me they're something to endure between the meatier character interaction. The Russos can film a decent punch-up but that's as far I'd go - nothing else stands out to me. Just hire Martin Campbell already.

 

ETA: no I haven't seen Shang-Chi yet

Edited October 25, 2021 by Hatebox

[Valonqar]

@exomassey

 

don't think so. They are in transition. Obviously, multiverse is going to be a big theme and we are yet to see how that is received in movies. SC was really well received both critically and by the audience but it was also a breezy adventure fantasy that the studio didn't hype as the second coming. Eternals stumble (in comparison to other movies and expectations) isn't an indication of reception going forward. It's one case, and as such insufficient to draw any broader conclusions. 

Edited October 25, 2021 by Valonqar

[BoxOfficeZ]

2 minutes ago, exomassey said:

I’m not trying to start a conspiracy or anything lol. 

 

If I attended a star studded premiere I would probably have a rose tinted view of any film not just Disney films. 

 

I didn't say it was a conspiracy. It's a perfectly reasonable take to have. Considering the close relationship influencers/critics have with movie companies (early access, favors, free seats, trinkets, etc). I work in the industry, believe me it's like the least shadiest thing I've seen lol. 

 

Anyways end of the day the only critic you should be really listening to is yourself.  

[Krissykins]

We don’t have to drag other films down too, just because Eternals is getting some bad reviews. 
 

It’s so early. Literally around 400 more still to come. 

[RRA]

2 hours ago, Valonqar said:

 

No it wasn't. AWIT was a bad movie period. Disney tried the Ghostbusters spin (blame men - using social justice to defend a movie that cannot be defended on film-making grounds) and it didn't work including cause the same male critics were more than welcome when they were (over)praising BP just a month earlier. So massive double standard there. 

 

It's very easy to open RT and check who is giving Eternals negative reviews:

 

3 Hispanic Men

 

3 women

 

1 Asian man

 

So 7 out of 12 rotten reviews weren't written by white men.

 

Among positive ones, only Mama's Geeky/Geeky Mama raved (5/5) the rest of women gave "A for an effort but effort ain't enough" type of reviews. 

 

 

 

 

Calm. Down. I said nothing about Eternals. Nothing. All I said was what Larson said years ago had merit. It’s why I wrote “OT.” 
 

I know fans are right now jumpy but jeez…

[SpiderByte]

1 hour ago, CJohn said:

Some of these reviews read like negatives but then at the end it says 6/10 and enters as fresh on RT. The MCU pass is real.

Ph please, like they aren't giving a pass to Dune because they want it to get a sequel.

[BoxOfficeZ]

4 hours ago, Movie nerd said:

Wow, it really is that bad. 

 

It's not that it's an awful film, I just found it tedious to get through.

 

Maybe MCU fans will enjoy it, but it's not for me. 

Edited October 25, 2021 by BoxOfficeZ

[RRA]

As much as a Marvelite I am, they’ve struck out before (IM2 for instance, what a mess) so I don’t have trouble believing that maybe this didn’t cut the mustard. It happens. 

[SpiderByte]

Amazing how people on here now think this is a bomb somehow. Far worse movies have done better than what you're predicting now.

[charlie Jatinder]

1 hour ago, charlie Jatinder said:

Tried comparing reviews of BW, SC, V2 and Eternals.

Eternals - 29/41 (71%)
SC - 23/23 (100%)
BW - 18/23 (79%)

Venom 2 - 8/14 (57%)

 

40% of Eternal reviewers didn't review the other two. (now that I am typing, I think I should have just considered those who reviewed all 3 films and not the one which reviewed ET as base).

 

Those who reviewed the other two, led to pretty much final score of two. So I guess ET may stay here as well. I will try to filter the reviews on basis of those who have reviewed all 3 in some time.

 

Reviewers who reviewed Black Widow 

 

BW - 18/23 (78%)
SC - 16/16

ET - 15/23 (65%)
V2 - 6/11 (55%)

Reviewers who reviewed Shang Chi

 

BW - 12/16 (75%)

SC - 23/23
ET - 16/23 (70%)

V2 - 5/10 (50%)

 

Reviewers who watched all 3 MCU movies

 

SC - 16/16

BW - 12/16 (75%)

ET - 11/16 (69%)

V2 - 4/9 (44%)

 

Not much clarification except that final result of other two was round same of this sample.

[Valonqar]

28 minutes ago, RRA said:

Calm. Down. I said nothing about Eternals. Nothing. All I said was what Larson said years ago had merit. It’s why I wrote “OT.” 
 

I know fans are right now jumpy but jeez…

 

And I say it doesn't have merit because the same critics weren't too male and too white when they were praising movies that supposedly weren't made for them. AWIT was a turd in the wind. Defense on the grounds of social justice wasn't convincing. It was desperate. 

 

Fair enough about OT will comment no more. 

Edited October 25, 2021 by Valonqar

[SpiderByte]

At the very least this means I'll never have to hear people whine about "critics have a Marvel bias" or "Marvel bribes critics for rave reviews!" anymore.