Batman v Superman: are critics not fans and vice versa?
Now that I’ve seen Batman v Superman twice, I’m allowing myself to delve in and read all of the articles out there about the movie, in particular the fact that despite almost overwhelmingly negative reviews, the movie seems to been successful a the box office.
This has led to an interesting development, being that the critics (that I had never assumed before were a homogeneous group), are hitting back.
There’s a strange tone developing in some of the articles that imply that “the critics” are delivering hard truths that need to be heard, that medicine is bitter, that they are somehow more intelligent and discriminating.
In contrast, “the fans” are painted as slavering, mindless, low-brow hordes who will devour anything thrown out there with the words Batman or Superman attached to them. There’s an implication that “the fans” are also one giant homogeneous group and are not critical thinkers and do not apply intellectual rigour to their analysis of a film.
In my mind this is flawed thinking. Do professional critics not include “genuine fans” amongst their number? Similarly, does the fandom horde cohort also not also include professional critics in their midst?
The two should not necessarily be mutually exclusive.
Why can’t we just agree that Batman v Superman is an extremely divisive movie.
The following things are (I believe) facts and cannot be challenged:
- the majority of professional critics hated the movie
- a large number of non-professional critics who viewed the movie were pre-existing members of the fandom and hated it
- a large number of non-professional critics who viewed the movie were pre-existing members of the fandom and loved it
- a large number of non-professional critics who viewed the movie were NOT pre-existing members of the fandom and hated it
- a large number of non-professional critics who viewed the movie were NOT pre-existing members of the fandom and loved it
The professional critics who have a broader voice/sphere of influence did not like the movie and were pretty open in their dislike. This does not make them wrong. Nor does it make “the fans” wrong/stupid/mindless/low brow/eager to eat up any old drivel.
There are plenty of big name, big ticket, highly publicised movies that crash and burn not only critically but at the box office. In the same way it’s offensive to dismiss the professional critics as being biased/irrelevant, it’s also offensive to assume that “the fans” are stupid. To be honest, die-hard fans, particularly comic fans can be amongst the most critical and analytical of viewers/readers.
The article ‘Batman v Superman’ shows people are cool with miserable blockbusters. The mega-success of the latest superhero movie is probably not a good thing says:
The lessons learned here are, alas, nothing new. Audiences ignore critics when they want to, projecting their own beliefs onto icons that may not deserve the genuflection. Superhero movies are here to stay. No one minds that these films often turn into jumbled, incoherent advertisements for future comic book movies. Zack Snyder knows what America and America-gobbling moviegoers overseas want, so long as he’s not making movies about talking owls or jaw-droppingly weird thingamajigs that are not-so-secretly about the patriarchal oppression of women.
There is also this rather obnoxious and patronising article from Ben Childs of the Guardian Is the biggest Batman v Superman smackdown between fans and critics? that says:
In the meantime, those convinced reviewers should keep their stinkin’ thoughts to themselves ought to be careful what they wish for. Prior to the Rotten Tomatoes era, Hollywood treated comic book movies as money-making fodder that fans would lap up as long as any old A-list actor could be persuaded to dress up in a bit of spandex. If it turns out that we’re heading back to the dreaded era of Sylvester Stallone’s helmet-less Judge Dredd, George Clooney as Batman and Alec Baldwin as the Shadow, fans of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice may end up wishing this is one battle they had never won.
The implication in the above two articles is that “the fans” should be afraid and should not dismiss the views of the critics as they are somehow protecting the fans from dross … the critics (being more discerning and intellectual in their analytical superiority) are the public’s last bastion against crappy films..
Really? That’s why we should care what the critics say? I don’t agree at all.
The critics have an important rôle to play because they are required to approach an analysis of a movie in a structure and analytical way. Presumably their organisations require them to address certain elements/aspects of every single movie that they review. There’s a degree of formality in their review. It doesn’t mean that their opinion is correct, representative or more valid than a fan - it simply means that there should hopefully be applying a similar indicia to all movies reviewed by them. Because of this formality, they might address certain things that might otherwise be glossed over.
Fan reviews by contrast are more variable. They can of course follow a similar, formal structure to a professional review or they could choose to only focus on things that are of interest to the reviewer.
Both types of review have their place. Then there’s the fan who doesn’t write any review at all, just chooses whether to buy a ticket or not. Just chooses if they [sic] want to see the movie multiple times or walk out part way.
The Childs article also has this rather odd paragraph in his review:
But there’s a problem with this vision of critics as detached, overpaid cynics - or Marvel shills - who are determined to beat the fun out of filmgoing. These same reviewers praised Star Wars: The Force Awakens to the heavens in December and tore Fantastic Four to strips in September. On those occasions, filmgoers largely agreed with their professional counterparts. In fact, nine out of 10 of the highest-grossing movies at the global box office in 2015 scored a “fresh” rating of 60% or above on Rotten Tomatoes, figures that dispute the idea of a major disconnect between reviewers and filmgoers.
I’m not sure his argument has legs i.e. professional critics and fans were largely in accord regarding reviews for the latest Star Wars so people are wrong to be upset with the professional critics in relation to Batman v Superman …
First of all, there were a lot of people on both sides of the fence who didn’t like Star Wars and who did like it. Also, they are different movies with different fandoms. Not all nerds are the same and while there’s a lot of overlap between Batman-Superman fandom and the the Star Wars fandom, they are not the same fandom.
It seems strange that he uses this the above as a way to rationalise why professional critics are right and shouldn’t be criticised by “the fans”.
In my opinion, the professional critics shouldn’t be criticised for hating the movie - but I have other reasons. Each critics is also entitled to their [sic] opinion - good or bad. The critics saw the movie and they are entitled to write about it. What they write needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt, but I’d argue that any review/commentary/fan write-up also needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
There’s no substitute to:
- reading articles and reviews from both sides of the fence
- actually seeing the movie for yourself and making up your own mind …
Similarly, I’d appreciate it if the professional critics would just back off and stop writing pieces that imply that popularity equates with being low-brow or stupid. Not all blockbusters are successes. There are reasons, sometimes very random, why movies become fan favourites. Princess Bride didn’t go very well at the time but it’s gone down in history as a classic and beloved by many people … There are heaps of move is that everyone assumes are going to go well because of the stars and the subject matter but don’t go well at all … think movie version of Daredevil …
Equally there are movies that I think didn’t get the credit they deserved like Edge of Tomorrow or … Pacific Rim!
The whole “critics vs fans” debate on BvS is a bit silly. Not everyone liked it. Some people hated it a lot. Some people loved it a lot and then each side feels the need to validate and justify its position by slinging mud on the other side instead of agreeing to disagree - given that this isn’t maths and science - liking something like this is a very subjective and emotional thing …
And it gets worse. There’s this article: No self-respecting adult should buy comics or watch superhero movies
I get that many professional critics hated the movie but they almost seem affronted that the masses dared to ignore their bad reviews and still go and see the movie.
The writer of the above article clearly hasn’t touched a comic since Casper the Friendly Ghost or Mickey Mouse days because he seems convinced that comics are for children and not for adults ….
He says dopey things like this:
“Films which are too dark for kids the comics were originally written for, yet too dumb for any thinking adult.”
“The trouble is the source material. In the case of Batman and Superman, this was originally written for ten-year-old boys.”
“I know that the stock response to this is that there’s no reason you can’t use superheroes to examine dark, adult themes. No there is isn’t, but just because you can doesn’t mean you should. “