If you own the BvS ultimate edition, and you saw it in theaters, then you are probably what I would consider a "True Fan"
That would be me, then. :)
But to speak to your point, my wife, who saw BvS in the theater and is whom I'd consider a good example of the "broader audience", also watched the Ultimate Edition with me. She didn't like BvS in the theater, but thought the UE did a much better job of making sense of everything and enjoyed it. Beyond the length, she wondered why it didn't get theatrical release...it probably would have quelled a lot of the griping. Superman and Luthor's motivations, as well as Batman's, were much clearer to her after watching the UE.
Very much with you on Age of Ultron. When people point out that the Marvel movies can do no wrong, I bring that one up. Suffered from the same Short Attention Span Theater that the theatrical BvS had.
Problem with both films is there was too much stuffed in there. Like trying to fit a complete Beethoven symphony in the span of a pop song.
I haven't watched the ultimate edition, but I can't imagine it made the dream sequences, parademons, and omega symbol any more accessible to a viewer like your wife. I could be totally wrong.
But to speak to your point, my wife, who saw BvS in the theater and is whom I'd consider a good example of the "broader audience", also watched the Ultimate Edition with me. She didn't like BvS in the theater, but thought the UE did a much better job of making sense of everything and enjoyed it. Beyond the length, she wondered why it didn't get theatrical release...it probably would have quelled a lot of the griping. Superman and Luthor's motivations, as well as Batman's, were much clearer to her after watching the UE.
This touches on what I was talking about. Without getting into the destinctions between “true fans” and “fanboys” or whatever other terminology you want to use, I think the idea that you can’t please both comic fans and a broader audience is ridiculous. If you adapt a story that requires a ton of backstory exposition to catch the audience up with the characters’ motivations, you're probably going to make a crap movie. If you adapt a story that will allow you to simply tell the story, you’ll have a much greater chance of success.
I haven't watched the ultimate edition, but I can't imagine it made the dream sequences, parademons, and omega symbol any more accessible to a viewer like your wife. I could be totally wrong.
She saw them for what they were - dream sequences. Does it help to have a geek sitting next to to explain what a parademon is? Maybe. Is it necessary? Not really.
Where it worked for her was explaining Superman and Batman's motivations in a bit more depth, particularly Superman's. He gets a lot more time. She also said she had a better appreciation for Luthor's role in the film (even if she didn't care for Eisenberg's portrayal). By the time they get to the actual fight (around hour 8 or so :) ), she said she understood more why they were going at it than she did in the theater.
"The movie's got to do $750 million, $800 million to break even. If they get anywhere close to that, they'll consider it a win."
And there were three different cuts of this movie they tested? One was Ayers' vision and the other two were more closely aligned with the studio's vision? Ugh. I don't think Kevin Tsujihara is the right man for this universe.
The movie was announced two years ago and then Ayer was given six weeks to write the script and develop the movie because the studio wanted to make the release date. There's just no way any big budget blockbuster could succeed in that environment.
An example I've seen several times the last handful of months:
"BvS was made for true(/real) fans, & they liked it"
When I inquire what "true fans" mean, I never get a clear definition. For example, is it defined as number of years reading comic books? Who defines the cut of point for "fan" & "true fan"?
If it's based on real time, does that weight the qualification? If someone is 10 years older then me, then they potentially had a 5yr window before I was able to read or get income to pay for comic books. So, wouldn't age & finances handicap fans?
Is it knowledge? Maybe you've been reading Flash for 10yrs, but one weekend I decided to read Wikipedia, websites, etc on the character. Is my short term interest in a character now on par with your decade interest & does that make us "true fans" of Flash?
Is it number of issues owned? Aside from who determined the cut off number, what if you like floppies & I prefer trades & digital?
Is it merchandise owned? Does no desire to own 20 different Thor shirts, figures, & pages disqualify people from being a "true fan"?
In the example above, are the mutually exclusive? I've been reading Batman for decades, I have over a thousand issues of the character, have had well over 20 different pieces of merchandise, & I'm pretty knowledgeable on the character...but I'm not a fan of the movie. Does that disqualify me from being a "true fan"?
What if I really liked the movie, but none of the other stuff? Does that qualify me as a "true fan"?
Note: here's where I've gotten ignored by the other person.
We always used "fanboys" to describe the hardcore I-know-more-than-you-do people who give a bad name to the hobby. True Fan to me might speak to someone who grew up on a steady diet of Ostrander's series and would like to see more of that come out in the movie. Is Waller a take-no-shit character? Is Boomerang a backstabbing asshole? That kind of stuff.
Problem is, of course, if you're making your movie solely for the "True Fan" you're already putting it in a niche market that doesn't lend itself to profitability.
I've defined it as passion. Whether it's a sports team, movie, or comic books, a "true fan" expresses his/her passion in different ways. It doesn't mean you have to like every.single.detail of whatever you're a "true fan" of. You can be a true fan of Batman, know he's used firearms & killed...but not be a fan of that particular aspect.
That's why I think the example way above is flawed, if not utter bullshit.
Well it could also fall under the "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy
A: "No fan of Batman would accept a movie where he uses guns and kills." B: "I'm a fan of Batman and I enjoyed BvS." A: "No true fan of Batman would accept a movie where he uses guns and kills."
But to speak to your point, my wife, who saw BvS in the theater and is whom I'd consider a good example of the "broader audience", also watched the Ultimate Edition with me. She didn't like BvS in the theater, but thought the UE did a much better job of making sense of everything and enjoyed it. Beyond the length, she wondered why it didn't get theatrical release...it probably would have quelled a lot of the griping. Superman and Luthor's motivations, as well as Batman's, were much clearer to her after watching the UE.
This touches on what I was talking about. Without getting into the destinctions between “true fans” and “fanboys” or whatever other terminology you want to use, I think the idea that you can’t please both comic fans and a broader audience is ridiculous. If you adapt a story that requires a ton of backstory exposition to catch the audience up with the characters’ motivations, you're probably going to make a crap movie. If you adapt a story that will allow you to simply tell the story, you’ll have a much greater chance of success.
I usually used the following distinctions:
"True fan": a passionate fan who can use some level of reasoning
"Fanboy": essentially a homer; someone who finds a way to justify anything negative about the subject
"Hardo fanboy": a pompous fan, who doesn't only justify anything negative about the subject, but elevates himself/herself & the subject to a pillar above the other fanbases.
Well it could also fall under the "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy
A: "No fan of Batman would accept a movie where he uses guns and kills." B: "I'm a fan of Batman and I enjoyed BvS." A: "No true fan of Batman would accept a movie where he uses guns and kills."
I think ultimately the turnoff for me of late has been the almost gleeful way people seem to be writing about these movies as if they're destined for failure or success before they've even hit the theaters en masse. A lot like those kids who hung around with the school bully and kept baiting the nerds to do something. "Oooo, didja see? Suicide Squad's not gonna make $100 mil this weekend!" "Yeah! Civil War made a billion in a day! In your face, DC Comics!"*
Hated that kid in school. Last I saw him he was assistant managing a Pizza Hut. :)
* To be fair, this isn't just happening with comic book movies. Seems to happen with every movie out there right now. I can almost picture a group of movie execs huddled around a computer screen anxiously awaiting the intiial RTomato projections.
This shows the stupidity of fandom. If the movie makes $1 billion, do these reviews mean dick? Nope.
I don't use critics to dictate my viewing decisions, but this turns me off to the movie like the spin used for BvS:DoJ.
This goes along with why I dislike Big Bang Theory; it makes comic book fans look like "nerds, geeks, etc."
M
I also question how many people-- actual fans, true fans, non-fans, human beings at all-- are actually involved in something like this. It takes one person to get an online petition going. It takes others a second to see it and click on it. And as of right now, there are less than 20,000 people (if these are even unique respondents-- there could easily be individuals using multiple accounts to juke that, if they want) taking those couple of seconds to express in this way.
Heck, I think there are probably more people reading Suicide Squad ON PAPER than have clicked on this petition. That is how small of a number we are talking about.
Are there people in fandom that feel this way? Sure.
Is this in any way a representative feeling of "fandom"? No.
But what it is, and that is why blogs love to cover stories like these, is another flavor of 'Look at the dum-dums do the embarassing thing with their over-feelings!' story that blogs and sites can't get enough of. It is an instant trend piece that takes 10 minutes to write and zero dollars to report. And it has that 'Hey, look over here-- someone on the Internet is being dumb!' hook that clearly drives clicks.
It's just another angle of laughing at comic book fans. But the number of people involved are anecdotal, the aim of the petition misunderstands how the world works, and the action required (follow a link to a petition, click on it) is insubstantial enough to be meaningful, I think.
If people find it amusing to discuss, so be it. But this petition, and others like it, speak for comic fandom or comic movie fandom about as much as a Boromir meme speaks for fantasy fandom.
I don't find what a relative handful of folks might click on, and then move on to the next thing, worth the attention it is getting. And those driving attention to those petitions (and probably exponentially growing the amount of support a petition gets by covering it) just have clicks to sell you. Because your eyeballs, and maybe that little part of you that wants to watch others embarrass themselves, are the product.
My deepest apologies, David D. I wasn't "selling clicks"...just thought it was interesting. Please forgive me.
Not at all-- sorry, to be clear, this is not meant to be against sharing things like this. I understand why it is part of this conversation. I just get frustrated that things like this and many other petitions or hashtags get reported on as if they are representative of comics fans, when I think they aren't. Often, I think they are over reported outliers, and they are easily spun into clickbait. An instant easy story that drives traffic to those who would mock and those who would agree. But at the end of the day the bar for entry on either side is just a click or a single passing comment. So they are likely not necessarily the real audience anyway.
So my frustration is just with this kind of reporting on the empty, created by the Internet for the Internet kinds of stories. That's all. But not meant to be directed at anyone here in particular.
It isn't JUST the reporting that's to blame. If these uber-fans only want to only be spoon-fed positive news about their favorite publisher, then maybe they need to stick to CBR or Aint It Cool News instead of going outside and hearing from the rest of the world. While the blogs are making bank on these kinds of trifling tales, and it does paint comic geeks in a bad light, I think Clint Eastwood said it best.
"We’re really in a pussy generation."
These children, idiots, man-babies, cry-bullies, noobs, trolls, nincompoops, fanboys, et al deserve to be exposed for their ridiculousness and shamed into growing up and getting real. If that means the blogs or just the more mature comic aficionados lead the way to that exposure, then so be it. They need to be shown that the truth is that they're being foolish, not protected from that shame by blaming the reporting of it.
The shaming is just another click to sell. In fact, it is likely the larger target audience of stories like these. The desire to shame and poke fun is an audience they are banking on.
If piling on to what are probably a lot of teenagers having their big feelings about something they will move on from a week later feels like important, noble work to you, the place of the mature fan, then have at it. It's your time.
If piling on to what are probably a lot of teenagers having their big feelings about something they will move on from a week later feels like important, noble work to you, the place of the mature fan, then have at it. It's your time.
But you're being had.
No I'm not. I have an ad-blocker and free time apparently if I am here.
And of course I don't feel like it's important, noble work, but that was certainly a smug way to say you disagree with me and Clint Eastwood. Well done. Until imbeciles are made aware of how foolish their reactions are, they'll continue to cry-bully anyone and anything that upsets them.
If piling on to what are probably a lot of teenagers having their big feelings about something they will move on from a week later feels like important, noble work to you, the place of the mature fan, then have at it. It's your time.
But you're being had.
No I'm not. I have an ad-blocker and free time apparently if I am here.
And of course I don't feel like it's important, noble work, but that was certainly a smug way to say you disagree with me and Clint Eastwood. Well done. Until imbeciles are made aware of how foolish their reactions are, they'll continue to cry-bully anyone and anything that upsets them.
I know how you feel, I once saw this one guy on the internet go on and on about how much a Captain America comic had upset him. And it turned out he hadn't even read the comic! Talk about reactionary!
I know how you feel, I once saw this one guy on the internet go on and on about how much a Captain America comic had upset him. And it turned out he hadn't even read the comic! Talk about reactionary!
You surely don't mean me. My wife knows how much I love Captain America, so she bought the issue for me. Forgettable in almost every way (unless you're Jewish), but this is a forum thread about Suicide Squad, which sounds like it too may be forgettable.
It isn't JUST the reporting that's to blame. If these uber-fans only want to only be spoon-fed positive news about their favorite publisher, then maybe they need to stick to CBR or Aint It Cool News instead of going outside and hearing from the rest of the world. While the blogs are making bank on these kinds of trifling tales, and it does paint comic geeks in a bad light, I think Clint Eastwood said it best.
"We’re really in a pussy generation."
These children, idiots, man-babies, cry-bullies, noobs, trolls, nincompoops, fanboys, et al deserve to be exposed for their ridiculousness and shamed into growing up and getting real. If that means the blogs or just the more mature comic aficionados lead the way to that exposure, then so be it. They need to be shown that the truth is that they're being foolish, not protected from that shame by blaming the reporting of it.
It isn't JUST the reporting that's to blame. If these uber-fans only want to only be spoon-fed positive news about their favorite publisher, then maybe they need to stick to CBR or Aint It Cool News instead of going outside and hearing from the rest of the world. While the blogs are making bank on these kinds of trifling tales, and it does paint comic geeks in a bad light, I think Clint Eastwood said it best.
"We’re really in a pussy generation."
These children, idiots, man-babies, cry-bullies, noobs, trolls, nincompoops, fanboys, et al deserve to be exposed for their ridiculousness and shamed into growing up and getting real. If that means the blogs or just the more mature comic aficionados lead the way to that exposure, then so be it. They need to be shown that the truth is that they're being foolish, not protected from that shame by blaming the reporting of it.
...that was certainly a smug way to say you disagree with me and Clint Eastwood. Well done. Until imbeciles are made aware of how foolish their reactions are, they'll continue to cry-bully anyone and anything that upsets them.
Foolish reactions like talking incoherently to an empty chair in front of a tuned-in TV nation a few years back?
/Take your meds, Clint... //Still think Unforgiven is one of the greatest movies of all time, though :)
...that was certainly a smug way to say you disagree with me and Clint Eastwood. Well done. Until imbeciles are made aware of how foolish their reactions are, they'll continue to cry-bully anyone and anything that upsets them.
Foolish reactions like talking incoherently to an empty chair in front of a tuned-in TV nation a few years back?
/Take your meds, Clint... //Still think Unforgiven is one of the greatest movies of all time, though :)
I definitely agree with some of what Clint said; we've grown quite thin-skinned. I've told my wife, if anyone shows up to my funeral & wants to say a few words, I want them to roast my ass or get kicked out. I've started writing my replies to be recorded & played at the funeral.
Also, Trump fails when he tries to be funny (if you look at the interviews & speeches as a whole, instead of the media sound bytes). Just as Clint failed when he tried to illustrate his point with "the empty chair" through his own method.
I would've used a little more set up; "I'd talk to Mr. President, but his presence is as empty as this chair", then moved forward with the speech.
Comments
But to speak to your point, my wife, who saw BvS in the theater and is whom I'd consider a good example of the "broader audience", also watched the Ultimate Edition with me. She didn't like BvS in the theater, but thought the UE did a much better job of making sense of everything and enjoyed it. Beyond the length, she wondered why it didn't get theatrical release...it probably would have quelled a lot of the griping. Superman and Luthor's motivations, as well as Batman's, were much clearer to her after watching the UE.
Very much with you on Age of Ultron. When people point out that the Marvel movies can do no wrong, I bring that one up. Suffered from the same Short Attention Span Theater that the theatrical BvS had.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/suicide-squads-secret-drama-rushed-916693
I haven't watched the ultimate edition, but I can't imagine it made the dream sequences, parademons, and omega symbol any more accessible to a viewer like your wife. I could be totally wrong.
Where it worked for her was explaining Superman and Batman's motivations in a bit more depth, particularly Superman's. He gets a lot more time. She also said she had a better appreciation for Luthor's role in the film (even if she didn't care for Eisenberg's portrayal). By the time they get to the actual fight (around hour 8 or so :) ), she said she understood more why they were going at it than she did in the theater.
This movie is going to under-perform.
So basically, it has to be as popular as Deadpool to just break even and be in the Capt America Civil War range to be a real money making hit.
No problem. Nothing to worry about here.
But as you probably already know, it isn't the whole symphony. 'Ode to Joy' is only the final movement of his Ninth Symphony.
Now this...
"BvS was made for true(/real) fans, & they liked it"
When I inquire what "true fans" mean, I never get a clear definition. For example, is it defined as number of years reading comic books? Who defines the cut of point for "fan" & "true fan"?
If it's based on real time, does that weight the qualification? If someone is 10 years older then me, then they potentially had a 5yr window before I was able to read or get income to pay for comic books. So, wouldn't age & finances handicap fans?
Is it knowledge? Maybe you've been reading Flash for 10yrs, but one weekend I decided to read Wikipedia, websites, etc on the character. Is my short term interest in a character now on par with your decade interest & does that make us "true fans" of Flash?
Is it number of issues owned? Aside from who determined the cut off number, what if you like floppies & I prefer trades & digital?
Is it merchandise owned? Does no desire to own 20 different Thor shirts, figures, & pages disqualify people from being a "true fan"?
In the example above, are the mutually exclusive? I've been reading Batman for decades, I have over a thousand issues of the character, have had well over 20 different pieces of merchandise, & I'm pretty knowledgeable on the character...but I'm not a fan of the movie. Does that disqualify me from being a "true fan"?
What if I really liked the movie, but none of the other stuff? Does that qualify me as a "true fan"?
Note: here's where I've gotten ignored by the other person. I've defined it as passion. Whether it's a sports team, movie, or comic books, a "true fan" expresses his/her passion in different ways. It doesn't mean you have to like every.single.detail of whatever you're a "true fan" of. You can be a true fan of Batman, know he's used firearms & killed...but not be a fan of that particular aspect.
That's why I think the example way above is flawed, if not utter bullshit.
M
A: "No fan of Batman would accept a movie where he uses guns and kills."
B: "I'm a fan of Batman and I enjoyed BvS."
A: "No true fan of Batman would accept a movie where he uses guns and kills."
"True fan": a passionate fan who can use some level of reasoning
"Fanboy": essentially a homer; someone who finds a way to justify anything negative about the subject
"Hardo fanboy": a pompous fan, who doesn't only justify anything negative about the subject, but elevates himself/herself & the subject to a pillar above the other fanbases.
M
"Suicide Squad Fans Want to Shut Down Rotten Tomatoes Over Bad Reviews"
http://time.com/4436621/suicide-squad-fans-rotten-tomatoes-petition/?xid=time_socialflow_facebook
I don't use critics to dictate my viewing decisions, but this turns me off to the movie like the spin used for BvS:DoJ.
This goes along with why I dislike Big Bang Theory; it makes comic book fans look like "nerds, geeks, etc."
M
Hated that kid in school. Last I saw him he was assistant managing a Pizza Hut. :)
* To be fair, this isn't just happening with comic book movies. Seems to happen with every movie out there right now. I can almost picture a group of movie execs huddled around a computer screen anxiously awaiting the intiial RTomato projections.
Heck, I think there are probably more people reading Suicide Squad ON PAPER than have clicked on this petition. That is how small of a number we are talking about.
Are there people in fandom that feel this way? Sure.
Is this in any way a representative feeling of "fandom"? No.
But what it is, and that is why blogs love to cover stories like these, is another flavor of 'Look at the dum-dums do the embarassing thing with their over-feelings!' story that blogs and sites can't get enough of. It is an instant trend piece that takes 10 minutes to write and zero dollars to report. And it has that 'Hey, look over here-- someone on the Internet is being dumb!' hook that clearly drives clicks.
It's just another angle of laughing at comic book fans. But the number of people involved are anecdotal, the aim of the petition misunderstands how the world works, and the action required (follow a link to a petition, click on it) is insubstantial enough to be meaningful, I think.
If people find it amusing to discuss, so be it. But this petition, and others like it, speak for comic fandom or comic movie fandom about as much as a Boromir meme speaks for fantasy fandom.
I don't find what a relative handful of folks might click on, and then move on to the next thing, worth the attention it is getting. And those driving attention to those petitions (and probably exponentially growing the amount of support a petition gets by covering it) just have clicks to sell you. Because your eyeballs, and maybe that little part of you that wants to watch others embarrass themselves, are the product.
This is not news. It is noise.
So my frustration is just with this kind of reporting on the empty, created by the Internet for the Internet kinds of stories. That's all. But not meant to be directed at anyone here in particular.
"We’re really in a pussy generation."
These children, idiots, man-babies, cry-bullies, noobs, trolls, nincompoops, fanboys, et al deserve to be exposed for their ridiculousness and shamed into growing up and getting real. If that means the blogs or just the more mature comic aficionados lead the way to that exposure, then so be it. They need to be shown that the truth is that they're being foolish, not protected from that shame by blaming the reporting of it.
If piling on to what are probably a lot of teenagers having their big feelings about something they will move on from a week later feels like important, noble work to you, the place of the mature fan, then have at it. It's your time.
But you're being had.
And of course I don't feel like it's important, noble work, but that was certainly a smug way to say you disagree with me and Clint Eastwood. Well done. Until imbeciles are made aware of how foolish their reactions are, they'll continue to cry-bully anyone and anything that upsets them.
Pot-Kettle.
/Take your meds, Clint...
//Still think Unforgiven is one of the greatest movies of all time, though :)
Also, Trump fails when he tries to be funny (if you look at the interviews & speeches as a whole, instead of the media sound bytes). Just as Clint failed when he tried to illustrate his point with "the empty chair" through his own method.
I would've used a little more set up; "I'd talk to Mr. President, but his presence is as empty as this chair", then moved forward with the speech.