Do you rate/judge CBMs the same way you do other movies?

There’s a lot of talk about “best” CBM. Is that criteria the same as the judgement for other films such as story, plot, script, acting, pacing, etc. or do people look more into how FUN it was, entertaining, and how much fan service it gave. Do you look at CBM differently. I think many people say TDK is the best based off normal movie critiques, because it isn’t as “fun” or visually pleasing as some of the DCEU/MCU that uses a lot of CGI and comedy.

I personally judge all movies with the same category, "do I enjoy it?"

It is sometimes fun to look at some techniques that are used in movies tho.

@thorofasgard:

There’s a lot of talk about “best” CBM. Is that criteria the same as the judgement for other films such as story, plot, script, acting, pacing, etc. or do people look more into how FUN it was, entertaining, and how much fan service it gave.

I judge every movie based on what it sets out to do. I don't complain about a David Fincher movie not having great comedy. I don't complain about a Judd Apatow movie not having great action sequences.

The same goes for comic book movies. I judge the movie depending on what it sets out to do. It's why I think The Avengers and The Dark Knight are equally as good, despite being entirely different films.

Why wouldn't I?

Yes, but I have my biases when discussing my favorites.

I dont try to overdramatically analyse a movie. If i like it i like it. I can analyse and tell if it really is a good movie or not, but thats about preference. There are in fact movies that i realise are bad, but i still enjoy them because why not,

I judge a movie for what it is, or what it's trying to be. If it sets out to be just a fun, enjoyable action-comedy like Guardians of the Galaxy or Aquaman, then I judge it as that, just by how fun it is. If it sets out to be a character-driven crime thriller like The Dark Knight or a gritty Neo-Western like Logan, then I judge it by how it succeeds in those aspects. Trying to judge all movies the same way would be impossible.

@theamazingspidey said:

I dont try to overdramatically analyse a movie. If i like it i like it. I can analyse and tell if it really is a good movie or not, but thats about preference. There are in fact movies that i realise are bad, but i still enjoy them because why not,

No

Nolan batman trilogy doesn't come close to A clockwork orange and the shining etc in quality, let alone IW, Ragnarok and xmen FC

That's perfectly fine. In fact, it's how 99% of people watch movies. The truth is, even professional critics, cinephiles (for a lack of a better word) and wannabe critics like all watch movies, decide whether they like them or not based on how much they're enjoying and are engaged by the movie, and then try and analyse the movie in an effort to understand and articulate why the movie worked for them and why it didn't.

Only a select few people watch a movie with the mindset of "hmmm let's seeee... is there any symbolism in this scene? Yes? If so, I like it! No? Than I don't like this movie."

I judge everything the same

Just like any other movie, yeah.

Yep

I agree. Not so long ago I was rewatching it, TDK is a masterpiece, two others sucks major ass compared to current MCU movies. I could hardly finish Begins and Rise due to how boring and bland they were. Nolan's trilogy is praised only because of TDK and how good Leather's Joker is in it.

No. I basically have TDK at 10/10 and use it as a scale.

TDK on its own wouldn't be a 10/10 in general sense. Maybe high 8 to 9/10.

Yes

Yes. The Dark Knight is one of the greatest movies of all time.

Yeah. My scale for all movies is essentially:

1-2: Offensively awful garbage.

3-4: Bad, but can sometimes (not always) be entertaining to watch.

5: Average. It's a good way to kill time and doesn't bring out any particularly strong feeling either way.

6-7: Good stuff that makes me emotionally invested in what I'm watching.

8-9: Same as above, but to a greater extent.

10: The best movies have to offer.

3-5 are where most MCU films land on that scale out of 10. Only Thor 1 and the first 2 Cap films are above that.

Yeah. Entertainment is one aspect tho

Yeah I would say I do. There’s always things to critique in any movie and things that can make one film (be it a cbm or whatever) better than another. But for me it’s pretty simple; either I was entertained or I wasn’t...more often than not that’s what I typically go by when judging these things

Like TAS said early, I judge a movie based off what it's trying to do. I'm not going into Guardians of the Galaxy or suicide squad expecting a deep examination of themes, I'm going into them expecting to have a good time. If a movie does attempt to have a deeper message and wants to tell a message more than just entertain, I'll evaluate it in that sense.

Pretty much for every comic book movie I'm just judging it by how much it entertained me. There's barely any comic book movies that actually attempt to analyze deeper themes and meanings(which is fine and probably a good thing), and while I haven't seen joker I haven't been all too impressed by the cbm that do.

Same

In my opinion, not giving high marks and therefore 9 or 10 to today's films (or old ones not so cited by critics) or in any case of genre when they deserve it, for me it is wrong, since it only contributes to aging the art of cinema, which it should be modern and in the making.

Stopping at classic lists like Godfather, 2001 a space odyssey and the usual boredom of titles and so on, you could practically stop and not see more films then.

We need to keep up to date, with all due respect for Coppola and Kubrick, giving 9 or 10 to old films only contributes to not be open minded.

Someone with 9s and 10s have exaggerated (MCU doesn't seem like a franchise for three 9s), but TDK has earned a strong critical respect and I think it can be considered a masterpiece without problems

Yes, my 5 main categories in rating/judging films (regardless of genre) are:

1. Story

2. Characters

3. Themes

4. Technical Aspects

5. Enjoyability

No. I use completely different standards when judging Comic Book movies than when judging any other type of movie.

For CBM I tend to be a lot less harsh and I only look at them for their entertainment values. I don't expect them to be deep and groundbreaking films or "poetic cinema". That would be a pretty delusional take, to be honest.

Yes.

I view them differently. Back in my days CBM was a risk and usually hit or miss, so I judge based on the source there using, and also what creative ways did they expand on said source.

Yes, I do.

For any movie I judge them on twice, once on objective film quality and once on entertainment and enjoyment.

I judge a movie for what it is, or what it's trying to be. If it sets out to be just a fun, enjoyable action-comedy like Guardians of the Galaxy or Aquaman, then I judge it as that, just by how fun it is. If it sets out to be a character-driven crime thriller like The Dark Knight or a gritty Neo-Western like Logan, then I judge it by how it succeeds in those aspects. Trying to judge all movies the same way would be impossible.

Basically this.

DC movies yes. Their varied and often very distinct, good or bad.

MCU movies no. Those tend to be cookie cutter samey flicks, which I exclusively enjoy for the fan service at this point

Yes and no. Like most of the times when I judge action movies I tend to look at them if they are realistic enough and if I can actually believe the plot. However, this doesn't really apply for CBM's.

Yes.

I judge based on how much I enjoyed my time watching and if it's rewatchable or not.

Yes. I judge all movies based on how much I am entertained by them. Nothing more, nothing less.