Black Adam, surprisingly, was one of the most divisive movies of the year, igniting a heated discussion among superhero fans with some feeling that all the movie delivers is a bunch of action sequences connected by a frail narrative that lacks substance.
Fans will never reach an objective consensus on whether or not Black Adam is an excellent movie because, when it comes to movies, it’s not always easy to tell. The beauty of cinema is precisely the subjectivity in theier reception, although Reddit users have shared a few movie criticisms that they absolutely despise.
“Let’s See You Do Better.”
Different from what the current scenario of box office fights suggests, movie making isn’t supposed to be a competition. Movies are directly related to one’s personal taste and healthy discussions among viewers are common, but Reddit users hate when fans of a certain project use the “let’s see you do better” argument since it has nothing to do with taste.
Redditor CotscoTPisBest comments, “they are transferring your apt criticism to you personally, instead of discussing why you think that in the first place, or –god forbid– agreeing with you.” Debating and arguing about movies should be a fun, thought-provoking practice within the film community, not a competition of ideas.
Whether viewers like it or not, the ending of a movie is arguably the most important part because it offers the very last impression of the film, as well as ties in all the loose knots. However, filmmakers might often opt for an ambiguous ending or a controversial decision, which can easily piss off audiences that aren’t content with a result they didn’t quite expect.
CapsElevatorScene states, “obviously endings can be really disappointing, but sometimes people are just annoyed they didn’t get what they wanted and dismiss it.” It’s important to understand the message a director tried to convey rather than what one’s personal opinion judges more relevant.
The internet is obsessed with plot holes and although it’s often fun to follow a few movie slips here and there, it can easily become a problem when people start watching movies only to capture flaws and, consequentially, invalidate all the hard work of a film crew due to one detail or another.
Redditor czartaylor claims, “fiction and real life has plot holes, and it doesn’t make a movie worse to have them unless it just wholly undoes the plot.” Minor things such as an object defying the rules of physics or a character making a small unnecessary decision should only be an innocent reminder that everyone can make mistakes and that’s fine.
It Doesn’t Follow The Book
Redditor ztreHdrahciR cites, “It doesn’t (exactly) follow the book” as an annoying movie criticism. Discussions such as being faithful to the book vs being faithful to the story happen every year as more books are adapted to the big screen, with many devoted fans of a source material constantly dismissing one of the most vital aspects of a good adaptation: interpretation, something that just like in the movies, differ from person to person.
A director often won’t adapt a book to the screen merely because they like the source material but rather because they want to use their own voice to tell a story they loved, which gives the filmmaker the freedom of making adjustments, as well as doing their best to fit several chapters and characters into a two-hour-movie or so.
Plots That Are Too Simple
There’s a recurring movie criticism around movie plots that feel “too simple” as if that’s a bad thing. Effective writing is much more than a bunch of characters, conflicts, and locations intertwined; some movies aim at capturing everyday mundanity or addressing character psychology on the surface in favor of a fluid narrative that unravels through ordinary chores and straightforward conversations.
Richard Linklater has mastered conversational movies and is unanimously praised as one of the best living screenwriters. As single-ton rightfully points out, “simple plot does not equal bad movie or bad writing.” Many “plotless” movies use the setup of ordinary people hanging out as a precious asset of art imitating life.
Ratings Over Quality
The biggest disadvantage of relying too much on film communities such as IMDb, Letterboxd, and critics outlets is how a movie’s rating can influence viewers to not experience the movie by themselves, almost as if a 2.5 rating represents a universal truth about the film’s quality.
Reddit user Disastrous-Golf7216 states, “These same people putting a movie down based on critics, are also the ones that have never watched the movie.” Movies offer an experience that varies from person to person and anyone can find merit in what’s considered “the worst movie ever”, as well as movies considered masterpieces might not have the same impact on certain audiences, destroying high expectations.
“You Just Don’t Get It!”
Reddit user anddingowashisnameoh comments, “one of the biggest hand-waves: ‘you just don’t get it!'” Like every other art, movies appeal to different tastes, but that shouldn’t be the same as Marvel fans aren’t capable of enjoying a good horror movie, for example. And in case they don’t enjoy it, it shouldn’t have anything to do with their previous taste.
Certain movies aim at a very specific audience, particularly the most experimental ones, but they often make it clear to viewers what they can expect from the rest of it. Arguing that someone “didn’t get it” is invalidating a personal opinion, especially because what made sense to one person can mean the opposite to another.
The Action Flick Formula
A common assumption regarding action flicks and blockbusters is that these movies were made specifically to audiences turn their brain off and simply enjoy a compilation of soulless action sequences, almost as if the whole genre can be boiled down to a few explosions and gunshots. Although action movies need a good dose of adrenaline to live up to the audience’s expectations, there are many movies, such as Mad Max: Fury Road and Avatar, that challenge the formula of a generic action flick.
Redditor dccomicsthrowaway claims, “you can have that and a good film… why do so many people refuse to demand better?” Instead of worrying too much about releasing a handful of cliché action films every month, producers should invest in a good story in favor of a lasting experience, rather than a narrative that viewers will forget the minute they step out of the theaters.
“We Don’t Need This.”
Truth be told, some characters/franchises will never really die. Still, people are constantly trying to force an abrupt stop on projects that continue to impress and make tons of money. It’s a criticism that has become especially popular in 2022 as the upcoming Avatar sequel gets closer.
Bomber131313 claims, “No one asked for The Godfather II, but I’m sure most people are glad they made it. Are all sequels good films?… Obviously no. But we don’t get the good sequels unless someone makes them.” No one except die-hard fans wanted a Top Gun sequel, yet it ended up being the most successful movie of the year, resonating with audiences both young and old. The list goes on, and sustains an effective consistency throughout history.
CGI Deserves Merit
Blackbeard6689 mentions, “people who treat CGI as if it’s inherently bad or as if practical effects are always better. Practical effects can look awful, and CGI can look really good.” One technique shouldn’t efface the other, but rather provide different perspectives for different approaches.
What differs bad CGI from good isn’t necessarily the way it looks but how it effectively plays with what’s been shown onscreen, which reflects a much bigger problem: the overreliance on computer-generated imagery as a result of a rushed post-production process, sacrificing a film’s quality in favor of meeting ridiculously tight deadlines, for example.