I thought Momoa was excellent, as was his character, Lobo.
One constructive criticism I have is that the film would likely have been better served by having more of him. I understand that the story is not about Lobo, but without him, Supergirl and Ruthye fail and the brides are not liberated.
One constructive criticism I have is that the film would likely have been better served by having more of him. I understand that the story is not about Lobo, but without him, Supergirl and Ruthye fail and the brides are not liberated.
I think we got just about the right amount, but I agree that he wasn't used to maximal effect - because he's an instance of what I referred to as "too much coincidence." His actions intersect fortuitously with Kara and Ruthye's fight, rather than tying directly into their narrative.
Momoa and Alcock are both going to be around a lot in the DCU. Not sure either get their own movies.
This whole thing reminds me a little bit of Thor. Of the two, Supergirl is the better movie by miles.
@ichab unfortunately, these days critics include biased YouTubers that have a lot of subs/views. Nothing I care about.
Now.... The reviews from the general audience.... That is important to me. Because I'm one of them. I'm not someone on social media that needs to get attention so will go to either amazing praise or kick the shit out of something to get views because I need to make some money. Why would I care?
But if someone sitting on a bench reading a comic and I talk to him and they say 'that movie was a lot fun'.... That's someone who's opinion matters. Because the movie is made for THEM. Not the critics.
You can think it's absurd but those are the ratings actual audience members give and the B/B- rating lines up with unpopular comicbook movies, it is what it is. Cinemascores weren't invented yesterday to shit on Supergirl.
If the claim was that it was performing at a disappointing level, there would be no debate.
On the contrary, it was the most bog-standard of American action movie cliches.
Hero kills baddie. Audience applauds. (Mine didn’t.) Credits roll.
The book’s ending is a thing of thematic poetry and profound emotional and moral catharsis. The movie’s was the lowest of low-brow claptrap.
Though I will admit, your framing it this way sells it better than the movie did.
Yes, he frames it well. And I said something very similar on page one. I thought it was obvious until I saw people struggling with it before I posted.
There's also no debate that cinemascores for comicbook movies skew very high and that a B- is a bad grade in that context. You can look them up, look at older CB movies that you know were generally popular and not popular and how they scored and how those scores relate to the box office.
Very few comicbook movies get a C grade (Madam Web and Morbius for example), Joker Folie a deux is the only one to ever get a D iirc, so Supergirl is not as unpopular as those but a B- is still very far from well received.
C+
Saw it this morning. I love Milly Alcock as Supergirl. Krypto is a blast. I wouldn't mind seeing more Lobo in the future, but he didn't really stand out or anything. Unfortunately, the bad guys had Marvel villian syndrome and the story wasn't all that interesting because of it.
Saw it this morning. I love Milly Alcock as Supergirl. Krypto is a blast. I wouldn't mind seeing more Lobo in the future, but he didn't really stand out or anything. Unfortunately, the bad guys had Marvel villian syndrome and the story wasn't all that interesting because of it.
It was wrong both times, as narrative choices. In Cavill’s case, it was at least presented (albeit stupidly and unconvincingly) as being a desperate, life-or-death act, as opposed to an outright execution.
The 57/43 percent includes this dude who doesn't even have a Wikipedia page? No thank you.
Probably the things I liked most about the film were (1) the Krypton/Argo scenes, and (2) Eve Ridley as Ruthye. The latter character is a huge favorite of mine from the comic, and though this version was not 1:1, I thought they did her pretty good justice.
This is a female led super-hero movie. If the Rotten Tomatoes meter includes the Bro-Crowd critics than you can guarantee the movie would get a higher rating without them. As to why it's failing so badly overseas, it is highly possible that it has nothing to do with the movie itself, but rather the state of world affairs right now. I'm not saying the movie deserves praise--I haven't even seen it yet--it is just that every time (Wonder Women excepted) a female led super-hero movie is released it gets the same treatment regardless of quality.
As for the money projection discussion, doesn't that belong in the other thread?
????
I don't watch the non MCU Spider movies, but the Joker movie was actually really good. People just don't get that neither of the Joker films were actually comic book films--they were a different thing entirely. If the character had not been called The Joker then it would have received a very different reaction.
Maybe it's because I'm a fellow English person but her dropping out of the accent she was going for was distracting to me.
People see the Superman symbol as an "American" symbol and the U.S. isn't exactly the world's favorite country right now. (Not a political statement--just what's happening)