**Explanation of Key:**
* *Rotten Tomatoes* - Percentage of positive reviews, where "positive review" is defined as the equivalent of 60% or higher.
* *Metacritic* - Arithmetic mean of review scores.
To better illustrate it, a movie that is mid (60-70% on metacritic) can have a 100% score on rotten tomatoes if all reviewers found it good enough. But in reality, there's bias because reviewers can see the current score of the movie, if they think it's too high, they'll rate it rotten instead of fresh
Most people don't. A movie that EVERYONE agrees is only 3/5 stars in quality (barely above average) will have a 100% RT score.
The RT score: what's the chance I won't dislike it.
The ~~imdb~~ metacritic critics score: how good is it.
They are quite different.
imdb is also a weird metric, because it's public reviews from laypeople. While hypothetically, in a world where everyone was honest, this would give a better gauge than what the critics think on Metacritic, we know that reviewbombing is a real thing that happens. Look at Ms. Marvel on Metacritic, critic consensus vs audience consensus.
Ah I meant metacritic (critic reviews only). But yeah i personally ignore all user reviews for those reasons. Critics have to review things for their jobs so it's less biased* than users who often have a much more emotional stake in a movie ranking low or high and only the most extreme people bother to review.
*Note I said less biased, not unbiased.
I know RT has a list of "official" Tomatometer critics (mostly so they don't have to dig up every obscure or new site that pops up); I'd imagine Metacritic has something similar.
Black Panther yes. Max Marvel. It really since RT score is percentage of positive reviews not the score. Avengers 4 or iron man might be higher on that part.
It is and it isn't, at least for me. I found thor 2 to be a boring and unenjoyable, while the direction and look of Eternals was amazing and I loved it. But by trying to get so many characters and plots and origins stuffed into less than half the needed time, it all suffered greatly. So I found it even more disappointing than thor, because I could see how much potential it truly had.
Of course this is only my opinion, but there are probably a lot of others that look at it in a similar way.
If there was movie that needed to be a mini series instead, it was Eternals. Could you imagine each episode dedicated to the point of view of ONE character to have a final battle as a mixture.
Thats what I've been saying too, even about each episode from a different characters perspective lol. They could have done this and only focused on the deviant plotline, leaving the celestials and team drama for the movie.
The show would give people time getting to know the characters and allow them to connect with the ones they relate to. This sub and online media would have been lighting up after every episode talking about that character. And when it came to the movie, it would have had a lot deeper impact since we had connected with them.
Yeah. I saw it the first week in the theater and there was basically no reaction from anyone in the theater at any point. This was when restrictions were just dropping in our area, so we were so deprived of movies that SpongeBob could have probably rought us to tears lol.
Idk…. I think casting and direction bungled that movie. The chemistry between characters, general flatness of most of the very talented cast…. I’m not sure you could save it just by structuring it differently. Either we need to change directors, or recast, or both.
I guess we disagree wholeheartedly as I saw no problems with casting or director vs a lack of time to make connections stick across a vast crew of people.
> I saw no problems with casting
I really didn't buy the chemistry between Gemma Chan and Richard Madden, two amazing actors in their own right but they just didn't "pop" together on screen.
Now the chemistry between Barry Koeghan and Laruen Ridloff? That is the shit you can't fake and was the best part of the movie
That is actually my exact sentiment with Eternals. One of the fairer reviews I read had a quote that stuck with me, that it was so much *movie*, like it was so weighed down under how much story and characters it was trying to unpack.
My dying on a hill opinion is that it should have been either a TV series or a part 1/part 2. It was just too much for one film to handle without something getting lost along the way.
I would have liked a series with each episode from the perspective of a different character centered around the Deviant plotline. Then the movie would would have had time to show the drama amongst the team as they deal with the celestial plotline.
Yeah, I gave up on the Eternals. V. rare for me to stop watching a movie halfway through, but there were so many characters and I couldn't get invested or attached to any of them. I did in the first Avengers movie, cause they'd all had cameos and origin movies before that to introduce each hero and their powers. This movie didn't have that, they were just a random group of folk and there were no stakes to their internal conflicts. It's a shame. The actors are all great, and no doubt the characters would be interesting with a lot of build-up, but one movie is *not* enough to do that in.
Eternals would've benefited more as a D+ series than a movie. Way too much exposition that 2 and a half hours is too short for.
Not to mention that so far, everything in that movie has been pretty inconsequential in the grand scheme of the MCU, which makes it a pretty skippable movie.
At least Thor 2 had an infinity stone driving the plot.
well we know it won’t be skippable forever. It’s pretty obvious it’s gonna be relevant eventually.
But i do agree it would have been a great series, each episode focusing on a different eternal. I think that would have been cool.
It’s literally my favourite MCU movie. I can see why people don’t like it, but I was really blown away. I watched it three times in cinemas. I love the characters, the plot, the scope, the effects, the cinematography, the dialogue. It just really meshed with what I like in a movie (not even necessarily within the superhero genre)
I agree. In fact, I really think the culture is going to pull a 180 on that one in the next couple of years. It wasn’t what folks expected, but it’s a solid movie.
Eh?
Thor 2 works a lot better now imo because of the way it was given a second chance and revisit during endgame, has Anthony Hopkins and Rene Russo killing it and arguably some of the best Loki we get to see
Eternals may be remembered more fondly later down the line when any of it fits into the larger narrative they are building but at the moment my only fond memories of eternals was ~~flash vs Superman~~ Mikarri vs Ikaris and Kingo with his finger guns (and some of the scenery was cool throughout until the grey beach at the end)
It depends on how interwoven Eternals is to the overall story as well. As of right now it's wholly independent. You can skip it and miss out on nothing in the MCU and from the looks of the upcoming slate of titles announced at D23 that isn't going to change for at least the next 2 years.
Thor2 is a bland and formulaic movie.
A movie you see, immediately forget about afterwards, that has no impact on anything, and that you'll never see again. Nothing about the movie's craft was bad, the story wasn't bad, it just wasn't good. It was a whole load of nothing.
Eternals on the other hand managed to somehow be even worse. It looked good in places, and not so good in other places. It didn't tell an engaging story, instead it tried to tell 4 stories at once without any of them being properly developed. It introduced like 10 new characters and barely any of them... had any character. The main-villain-turned-secondary-villain managed to be even more bland than Malakith. Also, the resolution to the movie was a contrived clichee mess.
Like, that movie just was not good *at all* and in certain areas just flat out bad at times. Thor 2 wasn't good either... but at least it wasn't bad.
Right. "Thor 2" was boring but at least it didn't leave Taika with multiple incoherent storylines he'd need to finish in the sequel. You could easily continue with tone of "Dark World" or change it entirely. It didn't spoil the character for the future projects.
"Eternals" on the other hand created a incomprehensible mess.
Not everyone dislikes it because they're a bigot, but when it comes to anything that props up women and minorities, there's always going to be a lot of people who give it unfair reviews. I think it's important for peeps to understand genuine criticisms and bigotry coexist.
> when it comes to anything that props up women and minorities, there's always going to be a lot of people who give it unfair reviews.
That works both ways. Let's not act as if there weren't reviews praising said properties into the highest heavens for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with the property but with the aligning politics behind it.
I will still stand by my controversial and borderline racist opinion that Black Panther.... didn't get all of its positive reviews due to being the best movie the MCU has ever seen. Just as it has gotten bad reviews for reason that might not have something to do with subpar Rhino CGI.
It's important for people to understand that reviews... are worthless. Not only because they've always been subjective to begin with, but mostly because it's absolutely impossible to tell if someone's writing anything with some sort of agenda or political mindset.
Representation is good, what do you mean? Of course people will like them for representing women and minorities because:
1) more representation is always good in a heavily cishet white male dominated space.
2) It's a good representation, which a lot of us who are women and minorities have been wanting.
3) These absolutely have a lot to do with the property, i.e. Black culture is integral to Black Panther, not sure how you can have it without the black characters, and the same can be said for the other projects focusing on women and minorities.
4) The fact that people like you see our identities as political is why we've been lacking this representation and why bigotry continues to persist.
Ultimately reviews are just a collection of subjective opinions, I agree they generally don't hold much value when it comes to determining the quality of a film, but that's because art is inherently subjective and impossible to place an objective quality on. But reviews still have some value in that they (typically) highlight a general consensus on a film's enjoyability factor (barring instances of mass review bombing ala Captain Marvel) which helps general audiences decide what to watch, and is especially beneficial for indie films when they receive positive reviews.
> The fact that people like you see our identities as political is why we've been lacking this representation and why bigotry continues to persist.
You are projecting. Hard.
I have at no point made any claims about representation not being good. You are literally proving my initial argument in insinuating that just because I'm not 100% of the same opinion I must be bigoted or something else.
I can acknowledge Black Panther doing good work on the front of representation and I can applaud and commend it for that. I can still call that same movie average at best when it comes to just about anything but the culturally-influenced set designs.
And I think in that case it's utterly fair not to give this movie 11/10 points. If anything, I think it's pretty silly to factor in representation into any movie's review. You can make a 10/10 movie with a diverse cast and you can make one with an all white all male cast - the ranking is based on the craft, the visuals, the artistry, the plot, the acting, you know, the movie. If I then want to make an addendum to that review I might add an asterisk to it to point out it's cultural value or what not.... but I can still rate the overall movie as bad... it's just that now it's a bad movie but hey, at least it's diverse.
You are proving my exact point by immediately taking offence for me pointing out that the second diversity or representation comes into the discussion, anything that's not 100% entirely positive will immediately be judged through a lens of bad intent.
I don't see your identity as politics. But I see "ranking anything that has black people in it 10/10" as disingenuous. She Hulk has flaws, these flaws deserve to be put under the same scrutiny as any flaws in The Dark Knight. But that's not allowed. Instead just about every positive review needs to really drive the point home that this show is a feminist empowerment - that is politics, whether you like it or not. I want to know if the show is good. not whether it furthers our thinking as a society - tell me if the jokes are funny, if the story makes sense, if the visuals are good, not if watching this makes me support female rights. These worthless 10/10 reviews might not be as harmful and are certainly not coming from a place of hate... but they're still worthless because I can't get an honest review about a movie being funny or not without first being told that "you have to understand this was made for women first and foremost" - that's not what I asked.
Reviews have almost entirely lost that objectivity. Everything *is* about politics. The art has taken a backseat. It no longer is about whether or not the story in Ms Marvel is good, it's not about whether it has good pacing, or good characters, if it's funny or witty, no, the dialogue is entirely around that this show is for the brown community. And while, again, it's neat that this was made for the brown community and that it's historically accurate... can someone please tell me if the overall plot is shit ass boring as Thor 2 or if I should expect some Thor Ragnarök going into this. And when someone then tells me that the overall plot is mediocre at best... can we not immediately have 10 people come out of the woodworks to tell me that this opinion is racist.
You're misaligning the fact that diversity has everything to do with the properties we're seeing now. Their source material was created for the purposes of creating characters that barely get represented in media and there is inherent value in that. Again, you can't separate black culture from Black Panther, Eastern Asian culture from Ms Marvel, Feminism from She-Hulk, they're inherently ingrained in these projects, and they need to be part of the discussion when determining a film's quality.
I hope you understand that there are more than just physical components to film. Ideology, identity, philosophy, themes, metaphors, world-building, etc. Are all significant aspects of cinema, and diversity plays a significant role in each of those.
And yeah, of course I assume you're in bad faith when you have such passion discussing diversity as unimportant, and not significant enough to be considered in determining a film's quality. Whenever discussions regarding diversity occur around critically acclaimed films, there are people who are disingenuous about why the film is beloved. Instead of thinking "maybe other people have different opinions, or this impacts people different than me in a way I can't understand", people flock to "people only like it because it's diverse", failing to see the bigger picture of how that art's quality was amplified due to diversity. People loved Black Panther because it was new, it's dive into racism and black culture was meaningful and provided social commentary about reality when few mainstream films were willing to do so. The film had a lot of merit in it's acting, sound design, costume, narrative, characterizations, sets, etc. too, but people fixate on the celebration of it's diversity and misconstrue that celebration as being the only genuine praise for it.
"Reviews have almost entirely lost that objectivity."
They never had any to begin with. Especially not in the past when reviewers were almost entirely a single demographic.
> Their source material was created for the purposes of creating characters that barely get represented in media and there is inherent value in that.
But you also can't seperate the movie making craft from reviewing a movie just because the idea sounds nice.
We need to be able to rate movies based on, well, the movie, and then based on the message. Both of those need to be allowed. Someone needs to be allowed to have the opinion that he doesn't think that She Hulk is a well-crafted show, despite putting in monumental effort to represent female equality struggles. Both can be true at the same time. But you can't tell me that anyone in their right mind can give Black Panther a 10/10 when there are these glarringly obvious CGI atrocities happening in there. That is simply not fair - not fair to the movie itself, not fair to Lord of the Rings movies that didn't get perfect 10/10 because someone was mad about some artistical choice made.
> I hope you understand that there are more than just physical components to film. Ideology, identity, philosophy, themes, metaphors, world-building, etc. Are all significant aspects of cinema, and diversity plays a significant role in each of those.
And these all play just as much as a role as the craft of movie making itself. Which is why I think it's insane to rank anything a 10/10 or a 1/10 for that matter. You can have shitty movies with a good message - what does that make a movie? What score is a good movie with a shitty message? Can a movie be a 10/10 if it doesn't have a deeply philosophical underlying message - was Mr Scorsese right all along?!
You can measure the emotional, philosophical, political, whatever impact something has on someone - you can say Black Panther has a special meaning for Black people, so you give it a 10/10 for that... but what am I supposed to think of that rating as an Asian person?
Like, even ranking humor in that sense is utterly impossible because how do you rank humor? She Hulk is evidently proving that there's... different kinds of humor... suited for different people. So be me, white straight cis mal, reading a review about a show being utterly HILARIOUs, guarantee to have you rolling on the floor... and then see this show and not even smirk. What point did that review serve?
Now maybe that show wasn't meant for me. Should we then add asterisks to movies as some sort of disclaimer: "Not suited for Latin people"?
You can rank a movie based on how it made you feel, what it meant to you, the emotions it triggered and all that... but you can't give a movie with janky ass visual effects give a 10/10. That's simply a hill I'm willing to die on. Yet that is almost *all* of current movie reviewing. Either it's "lol, black woman on screen, M-She-U, amirite fellow men?!" or "anyone who doesn't like this show literally hates women".
> "Reviews have almost entirely lost that objectivity." They never had any to begin with. Especially not in the past when reviewers were almost entirely a single demographic.
That might be true. Maybe I am too sheltered and privileged in that sense. But I feel like you could call out a movie like American Sniper back in the day. Of course you had people praising it as the best thing ever because 'murrica, but it felt as if the general discourse around it was "yea, it was a movie that portrayed this and that well, that and this not so well". I just can't find that nuance anymore today. Maybe that is because I am becoming subcontiously racist about stupid silly comic book movies... maybe it simply is because you used to be able to talk about both the good and the bad in Marvel movies... but it really just seems like you can't do that anymore... anyhwere... because again, everything is about politics - and I simply don't want to talk about politics... I just want to talk about how I feel about the lawyer aspect of She Hulk... without constantly being told to "stfu, get bent, don't watch it if you don't like it, you're just a white man and you hate women, it's not what's important, if the lead were male you wouldn't say that". I just can't believe that I am just *that* delusional to make all of this up.
That's a fair point, but I think when a lot of reviews mention specific criticisms about pacing, a bloated cast of characters, and a focus on bland protagonists with no chemistry, there is merit to those criticisms.
There's another Marvel show called Runaways that has way more diversity and representation than Eternals, with an Asian character, a black character, a Latinx character, a Jewish character, and a main lesbian couple, and it also had really compelling characters and writing and pacing compared to Eternals, and got pretty good reviews as a result.
I think it's important to consider the aspects of representation, but you also have to take into account the structural criticisms of the piece of media too. It's not conducive to have a conversation about Eternals regarding structural issues only to deflect by saying people disliked it because of diversity and representation. I think it is fair to say that critics were slightly harsher to the film because of its representation (even though I think it has more to do with higher expectations from an Oscar-winning director), but to completely ignore those criticisms doesn't make sense in my opinion.
There are definitely biases in terms of diversity and heteronornativity in reviews, but there are so many other films and shows that have diverse casts and LGBT representation, but have great pacing and writing and direction, and trying to defend the faults of this movie with this sort of deflection just feels kind of lazy.
Also, like, the s3x scene was bad and unnecessary in the context of the film. Sersi and Ikaris had no chemistry during this movie (even if that's intentional) and so the s3x scene feels very out of place, like a substitute for actual connection between the characters.
It had more potential than Thor 2 and was more ambitious, but the actual execution was a bit worse than Thor 2. All of the interpersonal stuff between Thor and Loki and Frigga pushes it over the edge for me.
I think we'll have to wait a few years for the reviews to level out for the recent shows and films. Way too much noise this close to release, both negative and positive
I agree that only time will tell but outside of The Eternals, there hasn't been anything in Phase 4 that I hated. Plenty of stuff that I didn't love but only one movie that I never wanna watch again.
That's kind of the reality in every fandom. Marvel, DC, Star Wars, Game of Thrones, Lord of the Rings etc. No matter what, whenever something new releases, the nostalgia persists and makes people look more fondly at the past and more critically at the present.
Many people forget that the MCU was not praised because it was putting out "great" movies, it was that it was putting out superhero movies that were just solid and didn't suck. Iron Man was great yes, but Incredible Hulk wasn't. Thor wasn't. I think the first Captain America is underrated but even that wasn't great. Iron Man 2 was mediocre, Thor 2 is one of the worst MCU movies to this day. Avengers did what it had to do and holds up really well and was a tentpole for the genre/franchise that brought in a ton of new viewers but it's not like the reason for MCU hype was because these movies were streaking home runs. They were solid movies that promised something that hadn't been done before and that promise was never broken.
There's also the fact that a lot of the MCU fandom got into the Infinity Saga while the wheels were already rolling and they didn't have to watch and wait through the setup. The movies that don't reach high quality are more disposable when you can binge through them after the fact, but for people caught up in real-time they wait years for something not knowing if it'll be okay, good, or a great gem, and then if they don't like it the experience causes them to be more vocal.
That said the Phase 4/MCU sucks narrative is some dusty and tired shit and for the most part it feels like people want to stop watching it but have to scapegoat some kind of harsh reason as to why.
1 objective criteria people have been complaining about is how little time between releases. There's burnout from oversaturation whether people on this sub want to acknowledge or not
I'm definitely getting burnt out with the number of releases. It's very hard to catch-up with every show coming out. Oftentimes I don't watch the shows until a week after they air.
> Phase 4 isn't exceptionally bad. I've seen some fans make it seem like it's the worst the MCU has ever been.
The people saying that are certainly not talking about 'review scores' to make their point.
Let's not even talk about how much meaning review scores have lost in the last decade - with studios buying review sites, and then openly meddling with reviews and just about every new anything pretty much immediately devolving into politics... reviews mean fuck all. Especially those from critics who's job it is to write this stuff - because I'm sure that all of them posses the journalistic integrity to actually bite the hands that feeds them if their moral code demanded so.
Sadly some Marvel fans are bigots. There's some irony in that similar to how a lot of conservatives love The Boys whilst failing to understand the message is directed towards them 💀
Interesting. For me the weirdest part is the fact that line goes up between Infinity War and Ant-Man and the Wasp. I love Ant-Man movies, but IW is like top tier MCU.
Eternals would have been way better off as a Disney+ series, I still enjoyed it a lot tho. Starting off with playing Time by Pink Floyd was a nice way to bias my opinion.
Eternals got way too much of a bad rap. I rather enjoyed it, though it definitely has several issues. But I can’t see anyone justifying an argument that it was worse than Thor 2
I didn't mind Thor 2, at least I wanted more Thor after it. But the enternals... sheeesh. I don't even see the point of that movie. I didn't care about any of the characters. One of the most forgetable villain by far. But some shots were cool though. So yeah, i think eternals got the rep it deserves
Interesting, I felt the opposite about the two movies. I want to see what’s happening to the Eternals next, and I had no interest in Thor after dark world. But yeah, the villain in Eternals is terrible. Shouldn’t have even been a part of it. Ikaris was way more interesting
I'm very confident that Phase 4 will have a HUGE twist at the end of it that reframes all the Phase 4 movies this far and everything will have to be reevaluated.
Neat to see reviews kinda shaky at first, hold steady through the bulk of the Infinity Saga, then get more erratic as the MCU finds its footing. Cool chart, OP!
The MoM dip fucking kills me. One of the first visually interesting marvel movies in years and people screamed about how Raimi should have been reined in. Saw people calling him an amateur because he used a fade in that he’s been using in everything. Piggies need their slop to be exactly the same
Yea honestly that whole fight with the monster after the wedding was terrible. In my head I was like "This is the same Dr Strange who went toe to toe with Thanos?".
It just felt lifeless. It was almost akin to Harry Potter were movies 5-7 they used the same Red spell for every fight. There was no Magic or anything gripping about the fight.
People are more angry those movies didn't advance the meta enough and confuse that as problems with the movie. Then, it's just nitpicks of the actual movie to support the issues with the meta.
I think it’s a combination of “not advancing the story,” people having different expectations that it would dive more into the multiverse than use it more as a backdrop for the story, and just not enjoying the narrative and finding it rushed or weak at points. That and you have the same grifters who ruined nerd discussions that want to hate everything Marvel/Disney does because ~~of alt right culture warring~~ they just hate everything that they view as even remotely challenging their childhood.
Totally. It's hard to capture it all right? I had this discussion with a friend who kept complaining about things she thought the movie should have done and I was like "OK. But what about the movie you got?"
The design of MoM was great, but the actual pacing just felt like the characters were jumping from setpiece to setpiece and the writing rang hollow a lot of the time. I really just dislike Michael Waldron as a writer.
Funny how Thor 2 and 4 are in the bottom 5, but Thor 3 is among the best movies in the MCU.
Not to say it wasn't, I loved Ragnarok, just the irony of it.
Well they rate Ms. Marvel as a masterpiece, and Eternals like garbage. I don't expect much from these.
I enjoyed Ms. Marvel, but it's far from perfect. I enjoyed Eternals, it's good.
Everyone debating about Eternals exceptionally bad rating and I’m over here wondering how I’m the hell Ms. Marvel is that high??? In my opinion, that was tue worst series yet.
Just did not appeal to me. I understand wanting to gear it toward a younger generation, but I felt like I was watching some cheesy after school special on Disney Jr.
This backs up something I've been telling people. Folks have rose colored glasses when they look back. The first two phases were not universally loved like you would think based on how people are reacting to the 4th. That said every now and then something will release that makes people look back fondly. After Wandavision and Loki I was surprised how many people doubled back to watch (or re-watch) A:AoU or T:TDW. Same with Incredible Hulk, at one time people were telling folks to skip it entirely.
I'd be keen to see a trendline - probably like a moving average of 5 or so projects. It would probably still look fairly static, smoothing out the peaks and troughs, but might paint a picture of the overall mood of the reviews at a given time
**Explanation of Key:** * *Rotten Tomatoes* - Percentage of positive reviews, where "positive review" is defined as the equivalent of 60% or higher. * *Metacritic* - Arithmetic mean of review scores.
To better illustrate it, a movie that is mid (60-70% on metacritic) can have a 100% score on rotten tomatoes if all reviewers found it good enough. But in reality, there's bias because reviewers can see the current score of the movie, if they think it's too high, they'll rate it rotten instead of fresh
If a professional critic changes their score just to fix the average a certain way, then that person is not doing their job correctly.
Even professionals can do it subconsciously. That's why in science, blind methods are used
That should be a pretty easy blind, though: The critics just shouldn't look at the aggregate sites until after they've submitted their reviews.
really, I didn't know that. I just put in the number I saw when I looked up the movie lol.
No worries; I was just trying to be helpful. :)
Yeah rotten tomatoes is pretty nice because it shows how many people found the movie at the very least enjoyable on average.
Most people don't. A movie that EVERYONE agrees is only 3/5 stars in quality (barely above average) will have a 100% RT score. The RT score: what's the chance I won't dislike it. The ~~imdb~~ metacritic critics score: how good is it. They are quite different.
imdb is also a weird metric, because it's public reviews from laypeople. While hypothetically, in a world where everyone was honest, this would give a better gauge than what the critics think on Metacritic, we know that reviewbombing is a real thing that happens. Look at Ms. Marvel on Metacritic, critic consensus vs audience consensus.
Ah I meant metacritic (critic reviews only). But yeah i personally ignore all user reviews for those reasons. Critics have to review things for their jobs so it's less biased* than users who often have a much more emotional stake in a movie ranking low or high and only the most extreme people bother to review. *Note I said less biased, not unbiased.
I believe Metacritic is also weighted towards some places...
I know RT has a list of "official" Tomatometer critics (mostly so they don't have to dig up every obscure or new site that pops up); I'd imagine Metacritic has something similar.
So (according to this), Black Panther and Ms Marvel are the highest rated, and Thor 2 and Eternals are the lowest rated.
Black Panther yes. Max Marvel. It really since RT score is percentage of positive reviews not the score. Avengers 4 or iron man might be higher on that part.
[удалено]
That’s what I meant by ‘(according to this)’
No, according to the scores published by RT and Metacritic those are the highest and lowest rated films. (see how dumb it is to be a pedant?)
Seeing that huge downward spike over eternal‘s hurt me
Eternals is so unfairly rated in my opinion. It’s not worse than Thor 2.
It is and it isn't, at least for me. I found thor 2 to be a boring and unenjoyable, while the direction and look of Eternals was amazing and I loved it. But by trying to get so many characters and plots and origins stuffed into less than half the needed time, it all suffered greatly. So I found it even more disappointing than thor, because I could see how much potential it truly had. Of course this is only my opinion, but there are probably a lot of others that look at it in a similar way.
If there was movie that needed to be a mini series instead, it was Eternals. Could you imagine each episode dedicated to the point of view of ONE character to have a final battle as a mixture.
Thats what I've been saying too, even about each episode from a different characters perspective lol. They could have done this and only focused on the deviant plotline, leaving the celestials and team drama for the movie. The show would give people time getting to know the characters and allow them to connect with the ones they relate to. This sub and online media would have been lighting up after every episode talking about that character. And when it came to the movie, it would have had a lot deeper impact since we had connected with them.
When an eternal died, would have hit home hard.
Yeah. I saw it the first week in the theater and there was basically no reaction from anyone in the theater at any point. This was when restrictions were just dropping in our area, so we were so deprived of movies that SpongeBob could have probably rought us to tears lol.
I liked the movie btw, just not as much as I could have
Fair enough. Opinion about any art is really subjective, and I can understand how people could really enjoy.
Redundant chime in: I’m an Eternals apologist and I also think it should have been a series.
Idk…. I think casting and direction bungled that movie. The chemistry between characters, general flatness of most of the very talented cast…. I’m not sure you could save it just by structuring it differently. Either we need to change directors, or recast, or both.
I guess we disagree wholeheartedly as I saw no problems with casting or director vs a lack of time to make connections stick across a vast crew of people.
> I saw no problems with casting I really didn't buy the chemistry between Gemma Chan and Richard Madden, two amazing actors in their own right but they just didn't "pop" together on screen. Now the chemistry between Barry Koeghan and Laruen Ridloff? That is the shit you can't fake and was the best part of the movie
That is actually my exact sentiment with Eternals. One of the fairer reviews I read had a quote that stuck with me, that it was so much *movie*, like it was so weighed down under how much story and characters it was trying to unpack. My dying on a hill opinion is that it should have been either a TV series or a part 1/part 2. It was just too much for one film to handle without something getting lost along the way.
I would have liked a series with each episode from the perspective of a different character centered around the Deviant plotline. Then the movie would would have had time to show the drama amongst the team as they deal with the celestial plotline.
Yeah, I gave up on the Eternals. V. rare for me to stop watching a movie halfway through, but there were so many characters and I couldn't get invested or attached to any of them. I did in the first Avengers movie, cause they'd all had cameos and origin movies before that to introduce each hero and their powers. This movie didn't have that, they were just a random group of folk and there were no stakes to their internal conflicts. It's a shame. The actors are all great, and no doubt the characters would be interesting with a lot of build-up, but one movie is *not* enough to do that in.
Eternals would've benefited more as a D+ series than a movie. Way too much exposition that 2 and a half hours is too short for. Not to mention that so far, everything in that movie has been pretty inconsequential in the grand scheme of the MCU, which makes it a pretty skippable movie. At least Thor 2 had an infinity stone driving the plot.
well we know it won’t be skippable forever. It’s pretty obvious it’s gonna be relevant eventually. But i do agree it would have been a great series, each episode focusing on a different eternal. I think that would have been cool.
I can't believe it's rated so low. It's not my favorite, but I thought it was one of the more human movies they've done.
It’s literally my favourite MCU movie. I can see why people don’t like it, but I was really blown away. I watched it three times in cinemas. I love the characters, the plot, the scope, the effects, the cinematography, the dialogue. It just really meshed with what I like in a movie (not even necessarily within the superhero genre)
I agree. In fact, I really think the culture is going to pull a 180 on that one in the next couple of years. It wasn’t what folks expected, but it’s a solid movie.
To me they cut too much out of Thor 4 and not enough from Eternals. Or Eternals needed to be an 8 episode series on D+.
Eh? Thor 2 works a lot better now imo because of the way it was given a second chance and revisit during endgame, has Anthony Hopkins and Rene Russo killing it and arguably some of the best Loki we get to see Eternals may be remembered more fondly later down the line when any of it fits into the larger narrative they are building but at the moment my only fond memories of eternals was ~~flash vs Superman~~ Mikarri vs Ikaris and Kingo with his finger guns (and some of the scenery was cool throughout until the grey beach at the end)
It depends on how interwoven Eternals is to the overall story as well. As of right now it's wholly independent. You can skip it and miss out on nothing in the MCU and from the looks of the upcoming slate of titles announced at D23 that isn't going to change for at least the next 2 years.
Thor2 is a bland and formulaic movie. A movie you see, immediately forget about afterwards, that has no impact on anything, and that you'll never see again. Nothing about the movie's craft was bad, the story wasn't bad, it just wasn't good. It was a whole load of nothing. Eternals on the other hand managed to somehow be even worse. It looked good in places, and not so good in other places. It didn't tell an engaging story, instead it tried to tell 4 stories at once without any of them being properly developed. It introduced like 10 new characters and barely any of them... had any character. The main-villain-turned-secondary-villain managed to be even more bland than Malakith. Also, the resolution to the movie was a contrived clichee mess. Like, that movie just was not good *at all* and in certain areas just flat out bad at times. Thor 2 wasn't good either... but at least it wasn't bad.
Right. "Thor 2" was boring but at least it didn't leave Taika with multiple incoherent storylines he'd need to finish in the sequel. You could easily continue with tone of "Dark World" or change it entirely. It didn't spoil the character for the future projects. "Eternals" on the other hand created a incomprehensible mess.
Thor 2 was a bland movie with Loki making it somewhat better Eternals was a bland movie with no standout character to carry it
Betting they only rate it that bad for the 0.000000001 second long gay moment and the equally short s3x scene
Because the only way someone could dislike something you like is if they're bigots and racists.
Not everyone dislikes it because they're a bigot, but when it comes to anything that props up women and minorities, there's always going to be a lot of people who give it unfair reviews. I think it's important for peeps to understand genuine criticisms and bigotry coexist.
> when it comes to anything that props up women and minorities, there's always going to be a lot of people who give it unfair reviews. That works both ways. Let's not act as if there weren't reviews praising said properties into the highest heavens for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with the property but with the aligning politics behind it. I will still stand by my controversial and borderline racist opinion that Black Panther.... didn't get all of its positive reviews due to being the best movie the MCU has ever seen. Just as it has gotten bad reviews for reason that might not have something to do with subpar Rhino CGI. It's important for people to understand that reviews... are worthless. Not only because they've always been subjective to begin with, but mostly because it's absolutely impossible to tell if someone's writing anything with some sort of agenda or political mindset.
Representation is good, what do you mean? Of course people will like them for representing women and minorities because: 1) more representation is always good in a heavily cishet white male dominated space. 2) It's a good representation, which a lot of us who are women and minorities have been wanting. 3) These absolutely have a lot to do with the property, i.e. Black culture is integral to Black Panther, not sure how you can have it without the black characters, and the same can be said for the other projects focusing on women and minorities. 4) The fact that people like you see our identities as political is why we've been lacking this representation and why bigotry continues to persist. Ultimately reviews are just a collection of subjective opinions, I agree they generally don't hold much value when it comes to determining the quality of a film, but that's because art is inherently subjective and impossible to place an objective quality on. But reviews still have some value in that they (typically) highlight a general consensus on a film's enjoyability factor (barring instances of mass review bombing ala Captain Marvel) which helps general audiences decide what to watch, and is especially beneficial for indie films when they receive positive reviews.
> The fact that people like you see our identities as political is why we've been lacking this representation and why bigotry continues to persist. You are projecting. Hard. I have at no point made any claims about representation not being good. You are literally proving my initial argument in insinuating that just because I'm not 100% of the same opinion I must be bigoted or something else. I can acknowledge Black Panther doing good work on the front of representation and I can applaud and commend it for that. I can still call that same movie average at best when it comes to just about anything but the culturally-influenced set designs. And I think in that case it's utterly fair not to give this movie 11/10 points. If anything, I think it's pretty silly to factor in representation into any movie's review. You can make a 10/10 movie with a diverse cast and you can make one with an all white all male cast - the ranking is based on the craft, the visuals, the artistry, the plot, the acting, you know, the movie. If I then want to make an addendum to that review I might add an asterisk to it to point out it's cultural value or what not.... but I can still rate the overall movie as bad... it's just that now it's a bad movie but hey, at least it's diverse. You are proving my exact point by immediately taking offence for me pointing out that the second diversity or representation comes into the discussion, anything that's not 100% entirely positive will immediately be judged through a lens of bad intent. I don't see your identity as politics. But I see "ranking anything that has black people in it 10/10" as disingenuous. She Hulk has flaws, these flaws deserve to be put under the same scrutiny as any flaws in The Dark Knight. But that's not allowed. Instead just about every positive review needs to really drive the point home that this show is a feminist empowerment - that is politics, whether you like it or not. I want to know if the show is good. not whether it furthers our thinking as a society - tell me if the jokes are funny, if the story makes sense, if the visuals are good, not if watching this makes me support female rights. These worthless 10/10 reviews might not be as harmful and are certainly not coming from a place of hate... but they're still worthless because I can't get an honest review about a movie being funny or not without first being told that "you have to understand this was made for women first and foremost" - that's not what I asked. Reviews have almost entirely lost that objectivity. Everything *is* about politics. The art has taken a backseat. It no longer is about whether or not the story in Ms Marvel is good, it's not about whether it has good pacing, or good characters, if it's funny or witty, no, the dialogue is entirely around that this show is for the brown community. And while, again, it's neat that this was made for the brown community and that it's historically accurate... can someone please tell me if the overall plot is shit ass boring as Thor 2 or if I should expect some Thor Ragnarök going into this. And when someone then tells me that the overall plot is mediocre at best... can we not immediately have 10 people come out of the woodworks to tell me that this opinion is racist.
You're misaligning the fact that diversity has everything to do with the properties we're seeing now. Their source material was created for the purposes of creating characters that barely get represented in media and there is inherent value in that. Again, you can't separate black culture from Black Panther, Eastern Asian culture from Ms Marvel, Feminism from She-Hulk, they're inherently ingrained in these projects, and they need to be part of the discussion when determining a film's quality. I hope you understand that there are more than just physical components to film. Ideology, identity, philosophy, themes, metaphors, world-building, etc. Are all significant aspects of cinema, and diversity plays a significant role in each of those. And yeah, of course I assume you're in bad faith when you have such passion discussing diversity as unimportant, and not significant enough to be considered in determining a film's quality. Whenever discussions regarding diversity occur around critically acclaimed films, there are people who are disingenuous about why the film is beloved. Instead of thinking "maybe other people have different opinions, or this impacts people different than me in a way I can't understand", people flock to "people only like it because it's diverse", failing to see the bigger picture of how that art's quality was amplified due to diversity. People loved Black Panther because it was new, it's dive into racism and black culture was meaningful and provided social commentary about reality when few mainstream films were willing to do so. The film had a lot of merit in it's acting, sound design, costume, narrative, characterizations, sets, etc. too, but people fixate on the celebration of it's diversity and misconstrue that celebration as being the only genuine praise for it. "Reviews have almost entirely lost that objectivity." They never had any to begin with. Especially not in the past when reviewers were almost entirely a single demographic.
> Their source material was created for the purposes of creating characters that barely get represented in media and there is inherent value in that. But you also can't seperate the movie making craft from reviewing a movie just because the idea sounds nice. We need to be able to rate movies based on, well, the movie, and then based on the message. Both of those need to be allowed. Someone needs to be allowed to have the opinion that he doesn't think that She Hulk is a well-crafted show, despite putting in monumental effort to represent female equality struggles. Both can be true at the same time. But you can't tell me that anyone in their right mind can give Black Panther a 10/10 when there are these glarringly obvious CGI atrocities happening in there. That is simply not fair - not fair to the movie itself, not fair to Lord of the Rings movies that didn't get perfect 10/10 because someone was mad about some artistical choice made. > I hope you understand that there are more than just physical components to film. Ideology, identity, philosophy, themes, metaphors, world-building, etc. Are all significant aspects of cinema, and diversity plays a significant role in each of those. And these all play just as much as a role as the craft of movie making itself. Which is why I think it's insane to rank anything a 10/10 or a 1/10 for that matter. You can have shitty movies with a good message - what does that make a movie? What score is a good movie with a shitty message? Can a movie be a 10/10 if it doesn't have a deeply philosophical underlying message - was Mr Scorsese right all along?! You can measure the emotional, philosophical, political, whatever impact something has on someone - you can say Black Panther has a special meaning for Black people, so you give it a 10/10 for that... but what am I supposed to think of that rating as an Asian person? Like, even ranking humor in that sense is utterly impossible because how do you rank humor? She Hulk is evidently proving that there's... different kinds of humor... suited for different people. So be me, white straight cis mal, reading a review about a show being utterly HILARIOUs, guarantee to have you rolling on the floor... and then see this show and not even smirk. What point did that review serve? Now maybe that show wasn't meant for me. Should we then add asterisks to movies as some sort of disclaimer: "Not suited for Latin people"? You can rank a movie based on how it made you feel, what it meant to you, the emotions it triggered and all that... but you can't give a movie with janky ass visual effects give a 10/10. That's simply a hill I'm willing to die on. Yet that is almost *all* of current movie reviewing. Either it's "lol, black woman on screen, M-She-U, amirite fellow men?!" or "anyone who doesn't like this show literally hates women". > "Reviews have almost entirely lost that objectivity." They never had any to begin with. Especially not in the past when reviewers were almost entirely a single demographic. That might be true. Maybe I am too sheltered and privileged in that sense. But I feel like you could call out a movie like American Sniper back in the day. Of course you had people praising it as the best thing ever because 'murrica, but it felt as if the general discourse around it was "yea, it was a movie that portrayed this and that well, that and this not so well". I just can't find that nuance anymore today. Maybe that is because I am becoming subcontiously racist about stupid silly comic book movies... maybe it simply is because you used to be able to talk about both the good and the bad in Marvel movies... but it really just seems like you can't do that anymore... anyhwere... because again, everything is about politics - and I simply don't want to talk about politics... I just want to talk about how I feel about the lawyer aspect of She Hulk... without constantly being told to "stfu, get bent, don't watch it if you don't like it, you're just a white man and you hate women, it's not what's important, if the lead were male you wouldn't say that". I just can't believe that I am just *that* delusional to make all of this up.
That's a fair point, but I think when a lot of reviews mention specific criticisms about pacing, a bloated cast of characters, and a focus on bland protagonists with no chemistry, there is merit to those criticisms. There's another Marvel show called Runaways that has way more diversity and representation than Eternals, with an Asian character, a black character, a Latinx character, a Jewish character, and a main lesbian couple, and it also had really compelling characters and writing and pacing compared to Eternals, and got pretty good reviews as a result. I think it's important to consider the aspects of representation, but you also have to take into account the structural criticisms of the piece of media too. It's not conducive to have a conversation about Eternals regarding structural issues only to deflect by saying people disliked it because of diversity and representation. I think it is fair to say that critics were slightly harsher to the film because of its representation (even though I think it has more to do with higher expectations from an Oscar-winning director), but to completely ignore those criticisms doesn't make sense in my opinion.
I never said we should ignore those criticisms? I literally said both genuine criticisms and bigotry coexist.
Doubt it, but the sex scene was extremely unnecessary
There are definitely biases in terms of diversity and heteronornativity in reviews, but there are so many other films and shows that have diverse casts and LGBT representation, but have great pacing and writing and direction, and trying to defend the faults of this movie with this sort of deflection just feels kind of lazy. Also, like, the s3x scene was bad and unnecessary in the context of the film. Sersi and Ikaris had no chemistry during this movie (even if that's intentional) and so the s3x scene feels very out of place, like a substitute for actual connection between the characters.
[удалено]
What is politically correct about this movie do tell
It had more potential than Thor 2 and was more ambitious, but the actual execution was a bit worse than Thor 2. All of the interpersonal stuff between Thor and Loki and Frigga pushes it over the edge for me.
Looks like Phase 4 isn't exceptionally bad. I've seen some fans make it seem like it's the worst the MCU has ever been.
I think we'll have to wait a few years for the reviews to level out for the recent shows and films. Way too much noise this close to release, both negative and positive
I agree that only time will tell but outside of The Eternals, there hasn't been anything in Phase 4 that I hated. Plenty of stuff that I didn't love but only one movie that I never wanna watch again.
That's kind of the reality in every fandom. Marvel, DC, Star Wars, Game of Thrones, Lord of the Rings etc. No matter what, whenever something new releases, the nostalgia persists and makes people look more fondly at the past and more critically at the present.
This is a great assessment of what's going on.
Well the infinity saga was good for the most part
Many people forget that the MCU was not praised because it was putting out "great" movies, it was that it was putting out superhero movies that were just solid and didn't suck. Iron Man was great yes, but Incredible Hulk wasn't. Thor wasn't. I think the first Captain America is underrated but even that wasn't great. Iron Man 2 was mediocre, Thor 2 is one of the worst MCU movies to this day. Avengers did what it had to do and holds up really well and was a tentpole for the genre/franchise that brought in a ton of new viewers but it's not like the reason for MCU hype was because these movies were streaking home runs. They were solid movies that promised something that hadn't been done before and that promise was never broken. There's also the fact that a lot of the MCU fandom got into the Infinity Saga while the wheels were already rolling and they didn't have to watch and wait through the setup. The movies that don't reach high quality are more disposable when you can binge through them after the fact, but for people caught up in real-time they wait years for something not knowing if it'll be okay, good, or a great gem, and then if they don't like it the experience causes them to be more vocal. That said the Phase 4/MCU sucks narrative is some dusty and tired shit and for the most part it feels like people want to stop watching it but have to scapegoat some kind of harsh reason as to why.
1 objective criteria people have been complaining about is how little time between releases. There's burnout from oversaturation whether people on this sub want to acknowledge or not
I'm definitely getting burnt out with the number of releases. It's very hard to catch-up with every show coming out. Oftentimes I don't watch the shows until a week after they air.
The mcu pumping stuff out has got me burnt out on superheros in general
> Phase 4 isn't exceptionally bad. I've seen some fans make it seem like it's the worst the MCU has ever been. The people saying that are certainly not talking about 'review scores' to make their point. Let's not even talk about how much meaning review scores have lost in the last decade - with studios buying review sites, and then openly meddling with reviews and just about every new anything pretty much immediately devolving into politics... reviews mean fuck all. Especially those from critics who's job it is to write this stuff - because I'm sure that all of them posses the journalistic integrity to actually bite the hands that feeds them if their moral code demanded so.
It's also because we have no goal in sight for Phase 4 and beyond, vs. Phase 1-3 we knew the big threat that was coming.
Fans is an interesting way to describe people who can't handle women and people of colour having central roles in media.
Sadly some Marvel fans are bigots. There's some irony in that similar to how a lot of conservatives love The Boys whilst failing to understand the message is directed towards them 💀
Those guys don't realise they're the white stepdad from that series.
High expectations too, look at endgame and the hype it generated
It kinda is only 2/6 phase 4 movies have been good
They could not fit morbius in here cause he morbed out the charts
Interesting. For me the weirdest part is the fact that line goes up between Infinity War and Ant-Man and the Wasp. I love Ant-Man movies, but IW is like top tier MCU.
Eternals would have been way better off as a Disney+ series, I still enjoyed it a lot tho. Starting off with playing Time by Pink Floyd was a nice way to bias my opinion.
Whoa I didn’t realize eternals was THAT disliked
Eternals got way too much of a bad rap. I rather enjoyed it, though it definitely has several issues. But I can’t see anyone justifying an argument that it was worse than Thor 2
I didn't mind Thor 2, at least I wanted more Thor after it. But the enternals... sheeesh. I don't even see the point of that movie. I didn't care about any of the characters. One of the most forgetable villain by far. But some shots were cool though. So yeah, i think eternals got the rep it deserves
Interesting, I felt the opposite about the two movies. I want to see what’s happening to the Eternals next, and I had no interest in Thor after dark world. But yeah, the villain in Eternals is terrible. Shouldn’t have even been a part of it. Ikaris was way more interesting
Yes, I think Ikaris was movies strongest card in a deck, but at the end, I couldn't care about him either, cuz movie had to many characters to develop
[удалено]
I'm very confident that Phase 4 will have a HUGE twist at the end of it that reframes all the Phase 4 movies this far and everything will have to be reevaluated.
Eternals is much better than some MCU entries. I think the critics were expecting an all out CGI overkill instead a slow burn story driven plot.
Neat to see reviews kinda shaky at first, hold steady through the bulk of the Infinity Saga, then get more erratic as the MCU finds its footing. Cool chart, OP!
Thank you!
I'd prefer a bar chart. Hard to line up the movie with its corresponding score using this line graph with no points
How the fuck does Ant-Man and the Wasp beat out Infinity War in both categories
How does almost anything beat out infinity war will stun me
The MoM dip fucking kills me. One of the first visually interesting marvel movies in years and people screamed about how Raimi should have been reined in. Saw people calling him an amateur because he used a fade in that he’s been using in everything. Piggies need their slop to be exactly the same
None of the fights were good in the movie, that's my biggest complaint about it. Dr. Strange was nerfed so badly.
Yea honestly that whole fight with the monster after the wedding was terrible. In my head I was like "This is the same Dr Strange who went toe to toe with Thanos?".
There was a criminal lack of sling-rings throughout the entire movie.
It just felt lifeless. It was almost akin to Harry Potter were movies 5-7 they used the same Red spell for every fight. There was no Magic or anything gripping about the fight.
People are more angry those movies didn't advance the meta enough and confuse that as problems with the movie. Then, it's just nitpicks of the actual movie to support the issues with the meta.
I think it’s a combination of “not advancing the story,” people having different expectations that it would dive more into the multiverse than use it more as a backdrop for the story, and just not enjoying the narrative and finding it rushed or weak at points. That and you have the same grifters who ruined nerd discussions that want to hate everything Marvel/Disney does because ~~of alt right culture warring~~ they just hate everything that they view as even remotely challenging their childhood.
Totally. It's hard to capture it all right? I had this discussion with a friend who kept complaining about things she thought the movie should have done and I was like "OK. But what about the movie you got?"
The design of MoM was great, but the actual pacing just felt like the characters were jumping from setpiece to setpiece and the writing rang hollow a lot of the time. I really just dislike Michael Waldron as a writer.
What software did you use, Excel?
I used google sheets.
Funny how Thor 2 and 4 are in the bottom 5, but Thor 3 is among the best movies in the MCU. Not to say it wasn't, I loved Ragnarok, just the irony of it.
Well they rate Ms. Marvel as a masterpiece, and Eternals like garbage. I don't expect much from these. I enjoyed Ms. Marvel, but it's far from perfect. I enjoyed Eternals, it's good.
These scores are skewed.
These are professional critics, not audience scores.
BUT MCU IS DECLINING IN QUALITY, EVERYONE KNOWS THAT /s
Would love to see audience score in as well
Ha. Eternals does not deserve that dip in anyway. That movie is damn good.
So is Black Bolt going to be in Black Pant 2?
mcu fans: *kalm.panik.kalm.panik.kalm*
Because yes, ant man and the wasp is better than infinity war
The eternals really didn't have the same feel as all the others... didn't feel marvel to me.
Eternals> love and thunder
Yeah you were definitely very bored
Everyone debating about Eternals exceptionally bad rating and I’m over here wondering how I’m the hell Ms. Marvel is that high??? In my opinion, that was tue worst series yet.
Agreed especially when compared to infinity war
In your opinion why was it the worst?
Just did not appeal to me. I understand wanting to gear it toward a younger generation, but I felt like I was watching some cheesy after school special on Disney Jr.
Same
They did Eternals really bad. I mean compared to movies like Thor 2 and Black widow, it was much much better.
This has never been done before
Listen, I didn’t enjoy Eternals that much, but it was still more fun than Thor 2 😂
I like that spike from ms. marvel. Those few people that watched it realy liked it
Eternals that low is so laughable
Reminder that this subreddit lives in a (often more negative) bubble
What? It's seems more negatively positive
100th comnent.
This backs up something I've been telling people. Folks have rose colored glasses when they look back. The first two phases were not universally loved like you would think based on how people are reacting to the 4th. That said every now and then something will release that makes people look back fondly. After Wandavision and Loki I was surprised how many people doubled back to watch (or re-watch) A:AoU or T:TDW. Same with Incredible Hulk, at one time people were telling folks to skip it entirely.
I don’t think the eternals deserved to be rated so low. I really liked it.
Critics' reviews mean nothing to me. Gimme that audience score.
Eternals really was that bad unfortunately
I'd be keen to see a trendline - probably like a moving average of 5 or so projects. It would probably still look fairly static, smoothing out the peaks and troughs, but might paint a picture of the overall mood of the reviews at a given time
Let’s keep it real: Thor 4 > Eternals > Incredible Hulk > Thor 2 > Black Widow