MovieChat Forums > ranmast > Replies
ranmast's Replies
<blockquote> [–] QueenFanUSA (2552) 2 days ago
Please compare it to other animated OWs, please.
Do I need to remind you yet again that this is the sequel to THE HIGHEST GROSSING ANIMATED FILM OF ALL TIME?</blockquote>
Queen you are quite stupid. You are a big ignorant imbecile. Why do you want people to compare the OW of Frozen 2 with other animated movies, while keep calling Frozen 1 as the HIGHEST GROSSING ANIMATED FILM OF ALL TIME? Don't you know that all those animated movies you want to compare Frozen 2 OW also opened higher than the OW of THE HIGHEST GROSSING ANIMATED FILM OF ALL TIME? Still with a lower OW Frozen 1 made more at the end.
Why don't you better compare Frozen 2 OW with the OW of the HIGHEST GROSSING ANIMATED FILM OF ALL TIME? Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha...
Frozen 1 OW 93,933,226 in a <b>5 days span...</b>
Frozen 2 OW 130,263,358 in a 3 days span...
Frozen 2 is already making more in three days than the HIGHEST GROSSING ANIMATED FILM OF ALL TIME? in 5 days. And you say it is underperforming domestically. What an idiot.
<blockquote>[–] kuku (2164) a day ago
Of course, "all Solo did" was doubling the highest pre-sales record in the whole Marvel frachise to date.
But yeap, not such a big deal.
Sure.</blockquote>
You are full of shit. Maul was correct even if he didn't mean it.
Show us proof that Solo double the pre-sales record of Infinity War. Because, Infinity War was released after Black Panther and before Solo, so Black Panther was not the record for the "whole Marvel franchise" <b>to date</b> as you believe. Even the links you used to counter maul's full of shit argument explain the Solo situation.
Talking non-sense as always, you are...
I think yes, but who really knows?
agree
So, Top Critics Scores aggregate the reviews of the best known critics and major entertainment magazines and publications (leaving away youtubers and fansites), this way a score made by the best of the best of critics can be found. Now, for the Top Critics the Joker movie has a score of 44% which is Rotten. So, for the best film critics of this world Joker is a Rotten movie, who could have guessed that. Facts are facts.
In summary, there are three scores in Rotten Tomatoes:
Rotten: Bad movie
Fresh: Meh/OK movie
Certified Fresh: Good/Great movie
Lots of cry-babies and kids here who do not know how Rotten Tomatoes works, and of course they really didn't care because their favorite crappy DCEU movies get rotten all the time (as if this was the Site's fault and not the critics opinion). All they do is complain about the trust of the site and shit on it. Rotten Tomatoes does not review the movies, they just bring together the reviews of the main critics and give the movie a score based on those reviews. If your favorite movie has a low score, is not because of the RT site, but because of the Critics. You don't like critics, then ignore them and keep liking crappy movies, no one is going to try to stop you.
Also, as Queenie before mentioned, Rotten Tomatoes is partially owned by Warner Brothers, so any claim that Disney (which is the movie company causing more sore asses these days) has something to do with any high or low score in RT is beyond stupidity.
Now, to the point of the OP. For a movie to be certified fresh it has to have a score of 75% or above. This is taken for the rules Rotten Tomatoes has in the site and you can check them. A movie with 68% is Fresh (not Rotten) but not Certified Fresh. These are two different scores and mean two different things. So, Joker must not be considered a Certified Fresh movie as per their own rules. Of course, a company owned by WB could see the advantages of having the movie shown as Certified Fresh, at least during his opening week and a cunning mind will see why they would break their own rules to put the movie a label it does not deserve. This might be considered false advertising. Is not the same being "Fresh" than "Certified Fresh".
Finally, the best feature of Rotten Tomatoes are the Top Critics score. See, there are hundreds of Critics, but many are just fanboys disguised as Critics. There are also critics that only make reviews for some kind of movies (like just for Superhero movies) and there are also critics that are crappy improvised sites trying to do reviews.
It's always been like that for DC movies starting with the Dark Knight trilogy, thousands of 10 several days/weeks before the movies were even released to critics, much less general audience.
Now, it is fun when you hear people complaining and dismissing Rotten Tomatoes which only aggregates what Critics all over the world think, but are OK with the shit imdb puts. Ha, ha, ha, these fanboys are dumb.
The movie itself and it's plot won't inspire mass shootings. I don't think so, since people realize it is fiction and they will treat it like that. Before, psychos have seen these kind of movies and nothing happened.
The problem for this movie and the psychos is the reality that comes from it. Already, you can see some movements from the crazy front threatening critics that dislike the movie (many more than they thought). So, the danger is when it downs on them that the movie is not the critical darling they believed it will be (already 10 rotten tomatoes from TOP CRITICS), when they realize the movie, while probably successful (in the way it will make some money for the studio), won't be a box office hit, when the scores (already 76% RT) and Oscar buzz start to go down, then we should worry. When the issues in real life start to come, then bad things caould happen. REMEMBER TDKR, REMEMBER IT.
This is the typical sociopolitical, over dramatic, over acted, overreacted Oscar bait movie they put in theaters every single year for award contention during the last quarter such year. The only thing WB is doing here is putting the name 'Joker' on it in order to ride the wave of Comic Book Movies domination who is currently flowing in Hollywood these days, thus trying to get some extra money from fanboys.
As someone said, this kind of dark turns and criminal behaviors I can find in real life without the need to pay to see it just because it is the 'Joker'... I am out...
Yep
So, with the release of the movie in Digital/Blu-Ray format, old wounds have opened and there are several butthurt haters nitpicking this great movie. Then for them a reminder of what this movie is...
If you need another (of the hundreds you already have) proof you are an imbecile Queen, just look at this chart:
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?view=daily&id=bbjunglealice.htm
As you can see, TLK has a domestic advantage of 45+ millions over BATB until Thursday. And TLK is making consistently more money each day. So, as it is obvious for everyone but for butthurt Disney haters like you, there will be no crushing, no disappointment, no imaginary under-performances... Nope, TLK will pass BATB in every way. Numbers, real numbers, are the best proof you are an idiot.
Thank you NorrinRad, thank you! I needed something like that to illuminate my morning. I enjoyed the 25 times I saw the video just now...
Bad!
Now the movie is released on video and the dumb haters begin their final assault to this excellent movie. Watching the last posts, you see how butthurt they are about the success of Endgame, so much they are already putting stupid excuses to "dislike" the movie. But this is the only news that matter now. HIGEST-GROSSING MOVIE OF ALL TIME. OUCH!
And before Infinity War, the first Comic Book Movie ever nominated to a best movie Oscar: Black Panther. so it's 5 of the last 6. Wow!
Yes, but the Avengers Franchise is part of the MCU franchise and the butthurt lot will not accept this as "in a row"...
Thank you for addressing these sore losers with FACTS and NUMBERS. Each time I have to read the butthurt fanboys giving their opinion using the words cheat and re-release without even really knowing what they are talking about, I am like: wow, how have we progressed this far with so, but so many dumb people walking free in the world.
Now, regarding the "re-release", I know it is semantics and a technicality but for a movie to have a re-release, such movie had to have been out of the theaters completely. What Marvel/Disney did was more of an expansion including some marketing stuff (post credit, tribute), since Endgame was still playing in 900+ screens at the time. Expansions are common with films during their initial runs. So while I don't consider it a re-release, the important thing here is to make some people understand that even if they are stubborn and keep calling it a re-release, Endgame had already beaten Avatar original release before the expansion. And that even with the Avatar re-release (done 10 months after the movie was out of the theaters), Endgame passed it. So, yes, ENDGAME BEAT AVATAR, nice and clean...
Oh and before they come here with the inflation butthurt excuse, I had the duty to inform you that Endgame sold more tickets than Avatar, since most of the money from Avatar came from premium screens (3D and so), a gimmick that overtake any inflation excuse...
It is because some people are butthurt and keep downplaying the importance of the event. They keep saying over and over that it will only last until Disney re-release Avatar to use the highest grossing film as a marketing campaign for Avatar 2. This could be true, but at the end who cares? The reality of this is that by today A COMIC BOOK MOVIE, A MARVEL ONE, IS THE HIGHEST GROSSING FILM OF ALL TIME, EVEN IF IT IS ONLY FOR TWO DAYS OR TWO YEARS. It doesn't matter. The other studios, mainly DC/WB would sell their souls to be able to say that. It is a great accomplishment, it doesn't matter if it is short lived (as they wish for).
Man, they can do whatever they want and the can fuck it the way they want to, we still have the magnificent 23 forever and nothing can take that from us...