slikmar

Good catch! You're right. DC/WB has a bad history of trying to 'fix' what isn't broke and ignoring the source material or 'improving' it often to missing the point of what folks loved about the character. The first Wonder Woman movie, imo, got the character right. Shazam wasn't afraid to be a bit upbeat and positive . But despite the Whedon backlash, I am NOT a fan of the Snyder cynicism that was pushed on Superman.

Make that five.
 
I wanted to like it, I really did, but it simply abandoned everything I loved about the original. Old-school BG was about hope, and wonder, and faith, and family. Its characters believed in fighting together to protect their people from an implacable enemy, and carry them to a better future. The reboot was suffused with grief, cynicism, and guilt. There was no comradeship or even trust. Nothing to inspire them beyond survival.

RE: New Mutants. My advice is don't. Just don't. It is all bad you heard about and even more. Powers were altered. While New Mutants have baggage, they were pretty much edge lorded up too far, Magick became an A hole. etc. The setting makes no sense, and frankly, there was little to no internal consistency in it or the plot. They play up one baddie as the reason folks are detained but unless that baddie never ever sleeps, there's no way the crew couldn't have found a way out long before this. This tried to be a horror movie AND a superhero movie and it failed at both so badly. Terrible writing.
 
Please take in mind, I am saying this as someone who is, I suspect, a notoriously soft touch. I like things about movies others hate. I often LOVE movies others merely like.  So for me to say New Mutants is a $#*t-show, well, draw your own conclusions there. Now I am also out of the loop on some things folks love but superhero wise? I tend to be very forgiving.
 
I can't forgive New Mutants the movie

I thought the BG reboot was ok but the original was definitely superior. 

Apparently the latest Marvel is hated and reviled and needs a hug?
 
gets into the peanut gallery  and looks left, looks right, then yells
I LIKED SHE-HULK! IT WAS FUN AND WHACKY AND TRUE  TO THE CHARACTER
 
*runs like hell*

I would add one other thing, kind of goes with your One: How many times have we watched a DC film (I am specifically thinking the Superman movies) that were not even close ideologically to the character fans know. For all the arguments, Marvel has presented the characters we expected on screen.

a little after halftime my brother commented on all the close games. I said the Raiders seemed the only non close, but I expect them to make it close. Next thing my brother typed was that I was right and Raiders gave up 17 straight points.
I feel for him, he is a Raider fan and just a few years ago they seemed so close.

On one of the web comics I read, the main writer's daughter had discovered the MCU - due to She-Hulk. So he is watching his way through the MCU with her. He made a great comment that I think shows a major difference in why I liked Favreau's directing vs Waititi:
The Favreau Effect
I say “somehow”, but it’s largely thanks to Jon Favreau. He made a lot of decisions that established the MCU formula. In fact, the first Iron Man addresses some common complaints of later MCU movies. There are plenty of jokes, but it doesn’t feel like the movie needs to hit a quips quota. And not every character is funny. Really, it’s just Tony and Happy. Everyone else is serious.
Speaking of serious, the film takes its villain seriously. No jokes about the villain’s name, not off hand comments at the villain’s expense, no scene of the villain looking foolish. In fact, the finale is the longest stretch of the movie without a joke.
Director Jon Favreau knew when to emphasize the fantastic and when to ground Iron Man. Stark Industries weapons, for example, aren’t outside the realm of modern military possibility. And the Iron Man suit doesn’t have a technological solution to every problem. It has, like, two weapons. This emphasizes that without the suit, Tony Stark still has superpowers.
Jon Favreau got a lot of credit for directing the movie that launched the MCU, but these days Kevin Feige seems to be the name equated to its success. I know Favreau still regularly appears as Happy Hogan and he works with Disney on Star Wars, but I wonder if we’ll ever see him direct another MCU film.
 
Basically, he knows when to be funny and when to be serious. Ragnarok had way to many moments of try to be funny when it should be serious.

I would add one other thing, kind of goes with your One: How many times have we watched a DC film (I am specifically thinking the Superman movies) that were not even close ideologically to the character fans know. For all the arguments, Marvel has presented the characters we expected on screen.

Oh wow. I LIKED Black Adam fine, but we really disagree there that it was "at least as good as Black Panther" . I think Black Panther was the far superior movie. There was better Acting over all  in Black Panther  compared to Pierce Bronson being the stand out (With Aldis Hodge solid to good). The pulp era touches of Wakanda were a thrill. Overall better tighter writing in Black Panther as well imo. If Black Adam was a 7, Black Panther was an 8.5, again imo.
 
That said, yeah, Critics often seem to feel 'safer' trashing DC movies.
 

That's what happens when you have one or two Marvel-haters in there and they drive the rest of us out.
 
 
 
I feel as though Marvel's Phase 2-3 run was unsustainable, but the MCU is still consistently above average for the genre.  Whereas the DCEU seemingly has nowhere to go but up--if the suits will let it.

I think DC films get bad reviews for a multitude of reasons.
One, they often ARE bad, or at least are mediocre. I say that as someone who enjoys a lot of DC movies than others do.
 
Two, there seems to be a subset of Hollywood critics who either hate, or have grown to hate, the superhero genre. They're skittish about trashing obvious successes like Marvel/Disney movies have mostly been, because despite their best efforts, the fans will just look at them and go 'what the hell is wrong with these critics, that was a fun or even great movie'. But DC doesn't have Marvel's proven quality, fewer fans like em. So the critics can tear the hell out of them treating movies like Black Adam as if they were Puma Man in Bad 3D (Apologies to any Puma Man fans out there). I am not saying there is an organized effort by movie critics to discourage WB from making more superhero movies but individuals certainly seem to see this as a chance to discourage the genre as they focus on the DC movies like clay pigeons
 
Three, Expectations for superhero movies are not what they used to be. Not to put on my old man yells at clouds act out too much , but 'back in my day' I remember growing up with Spider-Man with mesh  eyeballs and cables coming out of his arms to swing on TV, or a big body builder just painted Green while wearing Bill Bixby's tattered second hand clothes... "AND WE WERE GLAD TO GET IT!"  . It was a desert of few waters. Now, we're in a river of superhero options! Saying something is a Superhero movie does not mean folks who consider themselves superhero fans feel like you're the only game in town.  It's the difference between a Western Fan getting to watch "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" or "Smelly Joe the Horse Killer" on TV. Most Western Fans will go for the better film even if Smelly Joe has moments and they only got so much time to watch.

Why would we post Wakanda Forever spoilers in the DC thread? 
 
Late to the party, but just got out of Black Adam.  It greatly exceeded my expectations, which have been set pretty low by prior DC films.  The Rock played The Rock, which is fine by me.  The JSA were the highlight of the film. 
 
Haven't seen anyone else mention this, but Black Adam was... fairly well written.  It's not Shakespeare, but it stayed mostly true to the source, had character-driven interactions and development, and most importantly it wasn't predictable.  On top of that, it was nice for a supers movie to not even bother with origin stories for a couple of characters, for once.

Columbo night brings us Greg Evigan and Tyne Daly vying for who can kill Steve Forrest.
CES

The guy is an obscure actor named Mark Hamill (pronounced HAM-uhl).  He plays the character Luke Skywalker in the Star Wars movies.

I have an emotional support animal. It's a chicken.
 
Specifically, a four-piece. With mashed potatoes, cole slaw, and a biscuit.

Well--darn.
There is no joy in Philly, and I'm not feeling so hot, myself.
I'm just gonna sit and sulk for a while. Don't worry, I'll be all right tomorrow.
I hope.
 

Major League Wrestling

Yeah, when they were little, I biught my kids one if those doodle in aluminum powder by controlling a pair of knobs toys.  I meant, anyway.
 
I accidentally bought an Escher sketch instead and every so often I have to go in after them.

My brother and I were just discussing the other night the 3 on 3 overtime and how much guys like Gretzky, Lemieu, Ovechkin, Howe etc. are thinking, man wish we had that in our day.

Och!
 

Don't be silly, David Carr wasn't a paraplegic.  Just a paranoid shell of his former self with PTSD.
 
Incidentally, David is the reason why Derek has always had one of the fastest times-to-throw in the league.