‘Batman v Superman’ Triumphs: Do Critics Matter at the Box Office?

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
Courtesy of Warner Bros.

In the days leading up to its release this weekend, major critics tried to outdo each other by cooking up the most devastating ways to dismiss “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” as a creatively bankrupt, corporately mandated cash grab searching fruitlessly for a coherent plot.

The New York Times’ A.O. Scott quipped that getting brained by a porcelain sink was more diverting than “Batman v Superman,” the Wall Street Journal’s Joe Morgenstern branded it “stupendously dispiriting” and Time Out’s Joshua Rothkopf hoped that “…audiences will reject Zack Snyder’s lumbering, dead-on-arrival superhero mélange.”

Instead of serving as box office kryptonite, reviewers watched helplessly as “Batman v Superman” smashed records, racking up $424.1 million globally and ensuring that the Dark Knight, the Man of Steel and a cornucopia of DC Comics’ spandexed finest will be flooding screens for years to come. Despite scoring an anemic 29% “rotten” rating on critics aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the Warner Bros. release scored the fourth-biggest global debut in history and the sixth-biggest domestic launch with $170.1 million.

“There’s a real disconnect with what some critics wrote and how the fans are enjoying the film,” said Jeff Goldstein, Warner Bros. distribution executive vice president. “It doesn’t take itself seriously. It’s just an enjoyable afternoon at the movies.”


batman v superman dawn of justice

Warner Bros. Chief Dismisses Superhero Fatigue: ‘Everything Looks Different’

The results are a devastating rebuke to the power of mainstream American critics at a time when many newspapers have already outsourced their reviews to wire services and the rise of bloggers has de-professionalized the practice of assessing a film’s attributes and demerits. In an age of declining newspaper and magazine subscriptions, getting a strong notice from a major reviewer may help smaller films like “Spotlight” or “Brooklyn” find success, but it does little for big-budget, special effects-driven spectacles. Featuring iconic characters like Batman, Bond or Iron Man, they arrive with what studios like to call “pre-awareness.”

There may be more to “Batman v Superman’s” success. In an era of popular discontent, when Donald Trump has amassed political capital by thumbing his nose at the status quo, the pile-on by establishment tastemakers may have even backfired.

“I think some of it was a backlash from the consumers to the critics,” said one exhibition industry executive.

It also is a testament to the enduring power of the Batman and Superman brands — the two title characters are firmly entwined in popular culture, having made their comic-book debuts before America entered World War II and appearing in 15 major films since 1978. The prospect of seeing the two biggest stars in the DC firmament clash on screen was too irresistible for audiences to pass up, regardless of what the Times or the Journal thought.

“Reviews don’t matter,” said Paul Dergarabedian, senior media analyst at comScore. “The Batsuit and Superman’s cape are made of teflon.”

Nor could critics kill “My Big Fat Greek Wedding 2.” The weekend’s other new release suffered a drubbing and an even worse 24% “rotten” score, and still went on to debut to a solid $18.1 million.

Given its impressive opening weekend numbers, it seems likely that “Batman v Superman” will eclipse the $1 billion mark worldwide, more than justifying the $250 million that Warner Bros. spent to produce the film and the millions more it shelled out in marketing costs.

The drop-off in its second weekend could be steep, however. “Batman v Superman” is the only one of the top ten domestic debuts not to score a “fresh” rating on Rotten Tomatoes, making it something of an outlier. Moreover, although its B CinemaScore signals that audiences like the film more than critics do, it’s not a rousing endorsement. Among films featuring the Caped Crusader or the Man of Steel, only “Batman and Robin” with a C+ and “Superman IV” with a C scored worse CinemaScore ratings, and both films fell flat at the box office. If word-of-mouth is tepid, “Batman v Superman” could end up making a disproportionate amount of its money over its opening weekend.

“Good reviews sustain a film in the lean weeks, in weeks four or five when it’s been out for awhile,” said Jeff Bock, a box office analyst at Exhibitor Relations.

The good news for Warner Bros. is that by opening the film in March instead of the summer, the studio largely steered clear of major tentpole movies. The next blockbuster hopeful, Disney’s “The Jungle Book,” doesn’t hit theaters for two weeks, giving “Batman v Superman” a long runway to pad its gross unless audiences start agreeing with A.O. Scott en masse.

Despite the bad notices, the studio appears to be plunging ahead with the creative brain trust behind the DC Comics films. “Batman v Superman” director Zack Snyder will oversee the next two “Justice League” movies with scripts by Chris Terrio, the co-writer of the latest superhero mashup. Both men have a track record of success, but going forward they may need to recalibrate their artistic rhythms. Perhaps freed from the awesome task of having to launch a sprawling cinematic universe and set up interconnected sequels and spinoffs in the course of a two and a half hour film, they will be able to find fresh ways to appeal to both fanboys and reviewers.

Then again, at a time when geek culture is dominant, and the influence of film criticism is more diffuse and less relevant, it may not matter.

“Superhero films are bulletproof,” said Bock. “The next ‘Avengers’ movie could be awful and it will still open to $200 million. It doesn’t matter what the final product is. People love to go to these films.”

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 162

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Most film critics aren’t nearly as “hip” as they would have you imagine. They’re not terribly insightful either. I’ll rip my hair out if I read one more review that uses the word “formulaic.” A more formulaic word in journalism cannot be imagined.

  2. Brenda J. says:

    The critics should be critiqued and, IMHO, gotten rid of. Why do people hang on these people’s “taste” when taste and audiences are incredibly subjective and diverse? Is there such thing as Universal Taste? Don’t think so. Awful that they get to wield such power, and usually from a kitchen table.

  3. Morfot says:

    Funny how things turned out a month later. XD

  4. Lame says:

    most of the people are plain stupid, they would watch kicking in balls for 2 hours and lol at that, thats why bad movies get much money

  5. Sonny Crockett says:

    Critics have outlived their usefulness. Hence, “blogging” now instead of writing for newspapers in the numbers they once did. Newspapers themselves may not be around in another 20 years. What it comes down to is, ANYONE with internet access can do or say whatever they want with zero ramifications while appearing to be the expert. What’s the qualifications to be a critic anyway, 2 years of filmmaking to decide “thumbs up or down (Lord I miss Siskel and Ebert!)?” It’s not so much that a review is negative, it’s the condescending, nasty-almost-personal, vitriol and venom nastiness that seems to follow a splashy headline on some bloggers page. Many critics use the same eye and mindset to review a film like “Transformers,” or any super-hero film, as they would a deep drama starring Emma Thompson and it doesn’t work. You’re supposed to go see a Superman or Batman or Wonder Woman or Avengers film to be entertained and escape for awhile from the rotten world we live in, with a big bucket of popcorn and watch the spectacle. That’s it. Of course the fan-boys, who you’ll never please en masse’, are another issue. For now it seems, the fans have given the immensely “talented” critics the extended middle finger when it comes to Batman v Superman as it rolls to a possible billion dollars and that’s great! i remember reading a review of The Farrelly Bros. movie, “The Three Stooges” and before the review of the film started, the “critic” said they never liked the real Three Stooges. How can you give an honest, non-biased review of film whose, comedy you never enjoyed?! Maybe when I retire, I’ll start a new web-page called: “Rottener Tomatoes” and it will be a critique’ of critics. We’ll list and grade them according to their reviews and we can see just what films they’requalified to review (Imagine?) OR, better yet, if there is an agenda there, other than to just review a film….

  6. DK says:

    The lack of interest and thinking by the critics led to the poor reviews. If they would have used their brains, they’d see this movie isn’t just a cgi-spectacle, action fest without humor.

  7. Marc B. Lee says:

    For the critics, a better understanding of the source material should be a prerequisite before entering a theater. The fact that Batman and Superman predates the childhood of the persons reviewing the movie also means they needed to have read a comic from then to now to be up to date on the “history” of said superheroes. If you expected “tights and a cape”, you’re an idiot. It goes much deeper than that. The maturity of the basic comic lover obviously surpasses those who chose to not understand what the hell was going on on the screen. Batman had a Robin killed by The Joker. Superman suffered his own death once. There is no Adam West or George Reeves. “This is reality, Greg”. An E.T. reference if you knew your movies.

    As Janice Haskins said, “Need to hire new critics. Fire the old ones”.

    So, I suggest the major studios who invite critics to see and judge their movies to look to Facebook or bloggers who are fan boys in addition to logical writers. Maybe me. I’e moved out of my mom’s basement decades ago and ever wore a pocket protector but still harbor great writing in the form of ..ahem…comic books!

  8. Need to hire new critics. Fire the old ones

    • Dylan s says:

      Amen brotha amen….. Shout the truth from the rooftops till your face turns blue, scream till you cannot scream anymore… Let our voices be drowned out by the “critically acclaimed” the naysayers with their precious masterpieces deemed fit for yours and mine viewing pleasure, yet let the truth be slapped across every single one of these self absorbed pencil pushers with their thumbs shoved so far up their asses, these squares we now call “critics” whom speak for the masses?? What masses are they referring to??? Whom do they actually speak for???? Not me that’s for damn sure… It seems like the little guy in the room is finally being heard wether they like it or not, and the fat lady is singing and these sorry so called critics are now getting called out on their own BS… The real masses are tired of these snooty out dated old lame ass big brother type of propeganda these fools try to shove down our throats… The masses connects with what we know and what makes us feel good that helps us connect with everyone’s inner child deep down inside wether you are 12 years old or 41 years old, the inner kid will always come out, and these critics need to go because their imagination or lack there of is so warped they do not speak for us or for what the average joe cares to see… They speak for that very very very very rich and wealthy upper echelon of that less than %1 class that deems life to be so utterly bland and fruitless and sees things in such a unsavory and down right hateful and ignorant almost matter. I mean who are we to judge each other? What really is a critic? Isn’t that someone who really just casts judgment on others or in this case movies in which he or she either agrees with or finds utterly boring and elementary etc… Does every movie really have to be structured as such that it must have “meaning, thoughtfulness, plot development, suspense, humor, genre, antagonists, protagonists, climax, beginning, and an end, etc etc etc…” Why can’t a movie just be fun…. A means of sitting back for a couple of hours and just get lost in our own imaginations and in the movie and get away from reality while we shove popcorn and soda down our throats and just have a good time, remembering our child hood “heros” and our memories while also building new memories for the younger generations… I mean it’s entertainment is it not? Why do we have to like what someone wants us to like, why do we have to dislike what someone else dislikes just because that person doesn’t have any inkling of the comic book world or the characters and stories behind it all or because they could never connect on that level as a child and are either bitter or anoyyed with the whole connection between That and the masses that they must go against what makes others happy and brings joy to others so that they can try to destroy that and ruin it for others… I mean screw that, I watched the movie and I loved it… 9 out of 10 critics were completely wrong if you ask me… And it doesn’t take a masters degree in journalism or a degree from Harvard etc to convince me otherwise… I really don’t get why critics hate this movie so much and everything that it represents… It’s sad really that people will try so hard to make others miserable and unhappy and not like something because they themselves could never understand what it means to connect to something so “childish”… I’m very disappointed in these critics to be honest, we really really need a new generation of critics man out with the old gaurd and in with the new blood we are taking a step back on society when these are the people that speak on behalf of us I mean really?

  9. Batman v Superman was always going to make money, anyone who thought otherwise was deluding themselves. However, this was mainly due to brand recognition. Everyone wants to see a movie where the (arguably) 2 biggest and most recognizable superheroes of all time square off against each other.
    The issue is that if it had been a genuinely good movie and not a really flawed one, it could have made 2 billion and given a nice boost to Justice League right out of the gate. Instead, it will probably make something over 1 billion and still leave people apprehensive about the future of the DC cinematic universe. If Warner keeps bungling the handling of its biggest properties, they’ll run out of steam pretty quickly while Marvel soars ahead.
    Also, this article is really missing the point: Critics don’t tell you if a movie makes a lot of money. I bet if you ask most of them, they will say that duh, of course it will, it’s two American icons with worldwide recognition in the same movie. What the do tell you is if a movie meets a certain standard of artistic integrity and quality. Is it saying something new? Even if it is a retread of older stories, is it innovative enough in approach to make a difference. Don’t fall into the trap of thinking it’s audiences vs critics, because what audiences are rating is “Did I have a good time?” while critics are analyzing the overall presentation of the movie and how it could have been made better.
    An average moviegoer might be able to give out an impression, like “wow, that was awesome!” or “yeah, it was fun” or “I got a little bored close to the end” but if they try to articulate why they thought that, their comments are usually generic and involve only their impression of the actors or the dialogue, at most with specific problems of the plot. But that is not what truly makes a good movie. A movie that is well put-together will make you overlook anything but major flaws in plot or visuals (look at how few people complained about the use of CGI in Deadpool because the movie was so well made and had them invested in the character that they didn’t have time to sit and think about the CGI).
    It’s a critic’s job to notice and point these things out. You may not agree with the level of enjoyment they got out of the movie but unless the critic is really biased, most of the stuff they say is correct.

  10. ogaltely says:

    Now comparing Batman v Superman‘s success to Donald Trump’s is just evil.

  11. Reupert says:

    This movie blow’s me away! I loved it! Mr. Big Ben delivers. Don’t mind every word what the critic’s says, even the historians, just follow what your heart says. Blogger’s are entitled to their own opinion and sometimes they missed to deliver the objectives for being biased. My score is 5 STAR WTG BRUCE and CLARK!

  12. Butch Brock says:

    A film critics job is to help the audience interpret the subtext and find deeper meaning in the film. They’re supposed to us see and learn what we normally don’t get out of films. Most of the critics failed on those objectives for this film. The reviews just turned into personal attacks against the most trivial things. Anyone who felt the film was overstuffed and confused is just basically saying that they couldn’t follow along and didnt get the references. By no means was the film perfect, but it did not deserve the all out smear campaign because they didn’t like the dark and serious tone. For God’s sake, Antman scored an 80 percent fresh on RT! Seriously? The film critics have been fed a steady diet of popcorn fluff riddled with cheesy one liners and bad acting from Marvel. It seems they can’t palate a more mature offering.
    The Dark Knight trilogy was an exception to the above and a different offering. Those films didn’t feel like superhero films. None of the characters had any superpowers and Christopher Nolan kept them very much grounded in reality. Those films were shot as dramas and crime sagas, not as comic book movies. That’s the reason why the dark and serious tone worked.
    I’m done with the so-called critics, excuse me, bloggers, as I’m sure most of them have not studied film. I don’t need some pretentious snob telling me what to enjoy and what to take away from a film.

    • Victor Stone says:

      I couldn’t agree anymore. Even the most boring and by the numbers Marvel movies, like Incredible Hulk, Thor 2 and Ant-Man managed to get a “Fresh” rating on RT. And even some outright terrible movies like Iron Man 3 and The Amazing Spider-Man had a better rating than BvS. I guess those so called film critics will never like DC films, and they will always prefer Marvel’s more shinier and happier entries.

      But that’s not a problem. As long as people still go to the theaters, those critics won’t matter, and they will be nothing but whining snobs on the Internet. And there’s another thing: 3 years later and people still discusses Man of Steel, The Dark Knight Rises. But you can’t see no one debating forgettable Marvel movies like Thor: The Dark World, or Captain America: The First Avenger, Amazing Spider-Man 1 and 2…

  13. Jaybo says:

    This is like people saying they like McDonalds and food critics saying McDonalds stinks. Both sides are right.

  14. Lance says:

    Critics were right! This movie was an overstuffed, disappointing, meandering and gloomy movie with some stupid plot points. I hope this trash drops hard in it’s 2nd weekend.

  15. louharryblog says:

    I am a critic who reviewed Batman v Superman, which I didn’t find much merit in. My response when people say “But I liked it”? “I’m glad.” I never met a critic whose goal is to take down a movie–let alone decide that before he or she even sees the thing

    • spd says:

      You may say that, but there are several reviews which specifically told people to not go see the film. One even said to wait for the next Marvel film if they wanted to see a super hero film. That is an agenda to minimize a film if not out right destroy it. Critics often do have agendas, even if you may not.

      • Matt B. says:

        Telling people not to go see the film is not necessarily having an agenda or trying to destroy it. If they think it’s really not worth the $10 to go see, they’re just giving their recommendation. Where is the evidence that critics often have agendas (other than to review films to the best of their ability)? Saying there are several reviews doesn’t mean “often”. That’s several reviews out of over a hundred. That’s not even close to being often. But if you say it more accurately – critics sometimes (or occasionally) have agendas – it doesn’t support your point, so you go with an inaccurate adjective instead.

  16. sture says:

    watch it like reading a comic book. then you will understand

  17. Matt B. says:

    It seems this write doesn’t understand anything about the box office. Opening weekend, especially for a movie like this, has almost nothing to do with reviews. No matter what the reviews were like, Batman vs. Superman was always going to open huge. The only question was whether it would be closer to $150 mil or over $200 mil. With good reviews, it could have been the biggest opening ever.

    The real question, as far as critics’ impact goes, is how big the movie’s legs are. It’s not looking good in that department, considering the drop-off just from Friday to Sunday. It’s entirely possible it doesn’t even break $400 mil, which would all but prove that the critics had an impact on the box office.

  18. KeirinB says:

    Critics know nothing. I am a person who will decide what I want to see. I will Never let another person decide that for me. Critics are antiquated and useless. Buh Bye.

  19. This issue of critics vs audience kind of goes around in circles. On one hand, some audiences pereceive that critics are nothing more than stuck up snobs who love nothing but indie films. On the other hand, when a popular movie gets bashed by critics but yet does well at the box office or better yet is lauded by audiences then the critics feel that audiences are nothing more than mindless slobs and they feel powerless. Round and round we go.

  20. Dan says:

    This was a highly anticipated film that people were ordering their tickets for far in advance of any reviews though. A bad review (or, in this case, an onslaught of bad reviews) wouldn’t have any effect in that situation. Wouldn’t week two or week three of this movie be a more accurate indicator of that?

  21. Kevin says:

    There was sense that critics were going to slam this movie the minute it was announced.
    In fact many critics have publicly admitted they are weary of all the “super hero” movies.

    If B V S had bombed that would have meant Warner Brothers would have curtailed their slate of upcoming movies they have planned. When add the movies that Marvel has planned these critics dread the idea of having to go see and review a movie genre they detest.

    There is a segment of the population in general that feels a need to trash anything that is hugely popular with mainstream audiences. Critics usually are the first to beat the drum and gradually more people join in until it’s “uncool” to like whatever it is. Generally speaking once America throws away something it still remains popular overseas. The media then seeks to downplay a movie’s performance by ignoring worldwide box office totals in order to portray a movie as bomb.

    Case in point 2014 “Transformers : Age of Extinction” grossed $245 Million in North America but it grossed over $800 million overseas. In other words it made over $1 Billion! Is that a bomb???

    Many newspapers reported “American Sniper” as being the number one movie in 2014 which grossed $350 million in North America. Nevertheless the worldwide gross was only $547 million.
    In 2015 “Fifty Shades of Grey” earned over $571 million worldwide.

    Critics are biased and have always have been. Many hate the notion of “blockbuster tent pole movies”.
    Sometimes they feel they are helping small films by giving them great reviews and other times they seek to change film goers tastes by slamming popular genres of movies.

    Batman VS Superman was probably too long and the characters were not given an opportunity to display any real levity or sense of humor to make them fully dimensional. Last but not least the movie didn’t end with the standard “upbeat” happy ending we’re accustom to.

    Having said that hopefully with the “Justice League” movies there will come a point where there is more comradery among the various superheroes in the D.C. Universe. Over all B V S was a good first step towards introducing the formation of the “Justice League” franchise.

  22. Bill B. says:

    Critics matter a lot for small films & independent films (generally the same thing, but not always) films without big names, foreign language films and just about every intelligent film, but they do not matter to things like Batman, Superman, Hunger Games, and just about anything that has Marvel’s name on it, but even then, good reviews are better than bad ones.

  23. Ben says:

    People are most irritated with critics when they have thoroughly and reasonably slammed a movie like this one, because the critics remind people that they have simian tastes. The mass audience wants the freedom to love garbage, but not have anyone like a critic, or anyone else, remind them how simplistic, violent loving, and tacky they are.

  24. michael fantus says:

    Lois Lane was a great movie! Except when Jesse Eisenberg interrupted it. I think he was trying to play a character, but I couldn’t figure out which one. That LOIS though- couldn’t get enough of her, so it’s good there was lots of her. Her adventures and purity of heart and spirit, they are what heroes are made of. She totally dominated the film. I’m glad she let Batman in here and there and of course the whole movie was actually worth seeing because of Wonder Woman, but even then, Lois saves the day.

  25. nav says:

    movie critic is the profession which is there but nobody asked for it. if critics will disappear tomorrow nobody will give a fuck, if a person wants to see the movie h/she should and make up his/her own mind, one could hate a masterpiece and love dogshit movie, there are no right answers, there is no scientific formula which determine whether one will like a movie or not

  26. Daniella Isaacs says:

    People are so stubborn these days that they’ll stick with what they, at first glance, thought was going to be good (Batman v Superman, Donald Trump), no matter how bad those things end up being. They don’t want anyone telling them what to think and they thought it should be good, so… Odd times.

  27. Mark says:

    The job of a film critic isn’t to influence the box office performance of a film, it’s to review the artistic merit of a film. I don’t think “most” film critics would want to “negatively” impact a movie’s box office. Critics can positively impact the box office of small independent films though, which is a good thing.

    • spd says:

      While that’s normally the case, there were several critics who openly told their readers to not go to the the film and hoped that the film would fail at the box office. And those who feel every film made must receive a 85% or higher positive rating have seized upon this and called any person who has seen the film and really enjoyed it either stupid or uneducated or lazy, etc. The reception by those who are against this film, most of it by those who haven’t seen it, is being based off the reviews, while anyone who says they really enjoyed it are viewed negatively. So there is influence there.

  28. benji says:

    who wins

  29. Luzz says:

    I honestly feel with all the hype for this movie, many people went to see it with the sole purpose of finding flaws and taking it apart. It’s as if it gives them some sort of validation to be able to dislike anything that clearly cost a lot to create. This movie was such a great film. It took many traits from comics and previous animated films. Everyone I have spoken to and even in my theater were praising this film and applauding throughout. It’s a MOVIE, relax and enjoy with out trying to spend the WHOLE time finding reasons to complain. Enjoy the experience and stop trying to sound so pompous. Ben Affleck finally showed a flawless Bruce Wayne, Superman is clearly learning many things as his story as a hero is still new in this movie, Lex reminded me of the Lex in the animated series of JL unlimited. They way they show the open ending was brilliant. The film was beautiful. People are “trying” to call it garbage as if they can produce a film of better quality in their own backyard!

  30. Edoardo says:

    How arrogant must a critic to be in order to think that just because HE/SHE says a movie is bad, then everyone else should NOT go and check out the movie?

  31. Z4RQUON says:

    I didn’t read any review of this movie that actually told me something about the movie, meaning they could have been written after only having watched the trailer (which is what I think actually happened)

    Instead of giving an honest appraisal from which I can make up my own mind, these critics, it seems, were TRYING to sink this movie.

    • Kyoraki says:

      I have no doubt that critics purposely tried to sink this movie, they’ve always hated anything made by Zack Snyder including the masterpiece that is Watchmen.

  32. Naunghton says:

    I believe that the quote from Bock is false. Ladt year Fox’s fantastic 4 was terrible and failed at the box office and there was nothing that syood out saying it would be terrible. Cast was talented and it had a budget behind it.

  33. Brian Landon says:

    Look at what is happening in elections! People are not listening to the mainstream media either! They look now at so-called Journalists as lower than ambulance chasing lawyers!!

    The whole industry is changing. Critics have become as relevant as your old 64k Commodore.

  34. Murica! says:

    No, they never mattered. People should make up their own mind. I don’t need some pompous idiot to tell me what movie I should watch.

  35. Ian Fleming says:

    I’m not a professional critic, just a member of the public who purchased a ticket and I have to say that I hated Batman V Superman; Dawn of Justice. It’s an insult to cinema. If it makes money then it does so in spite of itself. It’s cynical and hateful and I never want to see it ever again.

  36. loco73 says:

    Well critics would matter if their reviews still did. But in an age where every moron, retard and nitwit can now call himself of herself a movie critic, it seems that actual movie critics have forgotten their job description and jumped on the “reality tv-15minutes of fame” bandwagon, where the mentality is not to inform and instruct movie going audiences, as well a critique movies, rather they want the soapbox and bullypulpit to carry in loud and shrill tones, their pseudo-intellectual babble to the rabble at the gates.

    But surprise, surprise, the unwashed masses have rebelled and responded by not giving a shit. “Batman V. Superman” being a case in point. And it does not necessarily mean that these critics-proof blockbusters and their bulletproof box office success is anything positive to be celebrated.

    These days I remember fondly Gene Siskel and his movie reviews. He not only liked or disliked a movie, he also went into detail explaining why. Listening to him was an education. He might not have been perfect or gotten it right all the time. But at least he tried. Which is more than what most of today’s “professional” critics even attempt to do.

  37. Fre says:

    It is simple, the mass audience has terrible taste, they love crappy pop culture garbage.
    It is not that the critics are wrong at all, they are correct. But the mass audience loves garbage.

    • Anamika says:

      How dumb. Avengers Age of Ultron garnered reviews which spoke so well of the movie but in actuality the movie was a shit storm. The Amazing Spiderman 2, Thor 2, and various other less than average movies got better reviews than this. In fact, they got good reviews. Iron Man 3 is another which got good reviews and didn’t deserve it. While, BvS is in fact better than all these and still got bad reviews from most while the audience LOVED it. People even went on to dissect MoS and TDKR (when they were good movies in general and worth while to watch) and deemed it as “bad movies” when they were in fact worth watching. The Amazing Spiderman 2 on the other hand was avoidable and still got better reviews. Its so annoying when every (self proclaimed) movie reviewer acts like the movie is up for an Oscar or something. It isn’t. Your job is to *inform* the audience whether a movie is worth the ticket money or not. Thats it. Stop feeling so self important. You ain’t no the Academy. huh

      • Philip Rolston says:

        Agree BvS better than those by numbers marvel movies. Sure the movie had jarring moments, Lex Luthor was miscast but was I bored like I was during the recent marvel movies. – no!! I got exactly what I expected going to see this movie – a great evening of entertainment and a few great “wow” cinematic moments at the movies – so glad the audience wasn’t dictated what to like by the critics

    • sam penman says:

      the critics loved the force awakens, and so did audiences. you can’t have it both ways.

    • Joseph says:

      Right, only if they agree with you right? Sorry not into the boring dull movies, critics like.

      • TuckFrump says:

        Yeah man I know what you mean. I’m a complete moron with a short attention span who can’t enjoy things that don’t have an explosion every five minutes too, and I’m tired of these smart people telling me otherwise!

  38. Iván el Terrible says:

    Critics stopped being relevant when they gave awards to boring artsy fartsy borefests like 12 Years A Slave, Milk or The King’s Speech because they were political correctness propaganda (while ignoring real masterpieces like Nightcrawler or Locke, which are much more innovating and creative).

  39. James says:

    What about the fact that most people just think it’s crap.
    See how much it rakes in on the second weekend. Then you can back up your Warner brothers sanctioned article.

  40. RR says:

    The movie was great..everything I expected it to be…to heck with the critics and the part time comic fans that don’t do research before they see movies…can’t wait for sequels…it just shows that some viewers rather senseless action sequences vs a good story line leading up to a bigger plot.

  41. Cynthia Foxe says:

    alas, eisenberg ruins it.
    tacky n over the top.
    ben was gr8!

  42. Jonathan says:

    I love this movie. I think critics and some had it in for this movie from the start. This movie had a lot of negative press from the director Zack Snyder, to the casting of Ben Affliact as Batman gave a negative momentous buzz. But after seeing the movie it was way better than what the critics made it out to be by far it is overcoming a lot of its negativity. Some of the critics were downright nasty. When they start saying wait for Marvel movies or learn from Marvel that shows bias. I wish the critics would have warned me how bad Age of Ultron was or Iron Man 3. I watch those movies once and I will never watch them again. BvS by Saturday would have watch it 3 times. Some of these critics are trying to kill off DCEU. I am glad I went and watch the movie for myself, I almost stayed home due to the reviews, I would have missed out on a spectacle.

  43. Dawud says:

    I was reading through this article and the comments and it’s funny how everyone can quote the Rottan Tomatoes critic score (29%) but gloss right over the fan score 73%. That tells me that most people who saw the move actually liked it. I saw this movie and thought it was pretty good. There were only few things I didn’t like but I would definitely see it again.

    And yes the critics do get things wrong. I remember how their was all these great reviews for The Babadook an Indy New Zealand horror film. The Critics pretty much wrote this movie into Netflix and Cable PPV but when I saw it I was like “meh”. maybe it’s scary to people who never had deal with a bad kid before. Babadook was not a bad movie just not as good what the critics hyped it up to be. The same is true with BvS. I can admit It’s probably not great move but it’s definitely not as bad as what the critics are making it out to be but once again I am a fan and liked it a lot. All I can say is the majority of people who have seen it including myself have liked it.

    • Silas says:

      Babadook is an Australian-Canadian film, not NZ.

    • Silas says:

      Lupe, look at which other superhero movies got B cinemascores. Green Lantern, Daredevil, Elektra, Catwoman, Steel, Fantastic Four (2005), Fantastic Four Rise of the Silver Surfer, Ghost Rider, Watchmen (which is a good movie, and hence an anomaly here). B is a bad score.

    • Silas says:

      “everyone can quote the Rottan Tomatoes critic score (29%) but gloss right over the fan score 73%. That tells me that most people who saw the move actually liked it.”

      How do you explain the bad cinemascore audience rating? The RT user score could have been manipulated by zealous fans (of DCEU or MCU for that matter). Cinemscore can’t be manipulated.

      • Lupe Walker says:

        What bad CInemascore audience rating? You might need to recheck your ‘fact’ before citing them. Cinemascore rating is a B! Recommendations and repeat viewings are through the roof

    • eric wadsworth says:

      I think people are missing the difference between ‘taste’ and a ‘critique’. Hardest thing about being an artist is to take on board critical feedback. Transformers 2 was almost unwatchable but it made lots of money. Lone Ranger wasn’t great but not terrible, John Carter was so-so, but both were relative bombs. What’s the difference? The wide fan appeal and easy translation to foreign markets. Short of certain intellectual property, good art typically matters at the box office.

  44. Stuart King says:

    The critics seem ike out of touch, jaded and possibly paid-off fools to me now. This is a landmark moment, in fact. They were so wrong and have their fingers so far from the pulse of the target audience that print media seems to have lost yet another life.

    • Silas says:

      I think this is an exaggeration. Critics probably are somewhat out of touch, but as the B cinemascore suggests, audiences weren’t too happy with it either.

      • Silas says:

        Lupe, again (since I misposted my other reply to you), these are the superhero movies that got a B: Green Lantern, Daredevil, Elektra, Catwoman, Steel, Fantastic Four (2005), Fantastic Four Rise of the Silver Surfer, Ghost Rider, Watchmen (which is a good movie, and hence an anomaly here). B is a bad score.

      • Lupe Walker says:

        I dont know where in your World a B is a not too happy rating. It’s an good rating and definitely doesnt mirror that of the critics. Beacues the critics are out of touch with this material

    • Len says:

      The difference is those films you mentioned are unwatchable and don’t have fans.

  45. Chrisz29 says:

    The movie was super fantastic!!! The actors are great!!! The story makes a lot of sense!!!! — of course it’s meant to guide fans for the upcoming justice league movie(s). I going to watch the movie again coz I can’t get enough of it!!!

  46. Mr Furious says:

    Critics don’t matter. Directors don’t matter. Stars don’t matter. Nerds are going to go watch crap and then complain about how bad it is and then line up for the next one because they’re mental children and they like what’s familiar to them.

  47. MightyMad says:

    “It doesn’t take itself seriously.”

    Yet it is exactly what DC fans praising this movie keep saying, again and again: finally, a superhero film that takes itself seriously!

    lol… this simple phrase pretty much sums up how much Warner have no idea what they are selling to their audience… and how much they couldn’t care less.

    Anyway, the smartest kids in the room already know that “BvS”‘s real B.O. test actually starts next weekend, without the aid of massive pre-sale and all. See you all then.

  48. Lance says:

    What a stupid article.

  49. webslinger48 says:

    The Transformers movies were similarly critic-proof, but let’s be honest here: Critics have never really massively impacted box office one way or another.

    However, in general they are a proxy for the audience response. If Critics overwhelmingly hate a movie, chances are aud’s usually aren’t too fond of it either, or are at least split. I.e. Green Lantern.

    Big box office does not always translate to audiences loving a movie. It merely means that a least a lot of people wanted to see it.

    • EricJ says:

      Let’s look at some other record breaking weekend openings:
      – Shrek the Third
      – Spiderman 3
      – Pirates of the Caribbean 3: At World’s End
      – The Simpsons Movie
      – Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
      – Avengers: Age of Ultron
      – Indiana Jones & the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
      – The Dark Knight Rises
      – Furious 7
      – Minions
      – Twilight Saga: New Moon
      – Fifty Shades of Gray

      To which we can extend that just a lot of people wanted to see it does not make it a good movie. Just that people tend to be a little too wishful-thinking for their own good.
      To take the other side of the coin, if Pan, Terminator: Genisys, Strange Magic and Jem & the Holograms have record breaking -low- openings, it means they couldn’t even be optimistic about those.

  50. Spike says:

    Nope. Critics? Quality? Something meaningful for minds of more mental age than ten? Redeeming social value? Who needs them when you have big B.O.? So, for the time being, studio putzes, you can thumb your nose at art? But rest assured, your day of reckoning will come—- when the sagebrushes will be rolling through the deserted studio lots- and not just for Westerns.

More Film News from Variety