Let's breakdown the jilted mind of a paid Disney shill

Reminder that Disney is paying for their vacations for an exclusive screening in France. The "unworthy" critics who don't kiss their asses aren't invited. It all boils down to creating a big niche of critics who really are just bought fanboys.

>>81769496
>I am Groot
Is this supposed to be a professional or a fanboy?

File: 1492036039750.jpg (1MB, 1200x1753px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1200x1753px

>waaah people don't like my shitty fucking movies

>>81769618
If you don't see a problem of gross fanboyism and unprofessional behavior with these "reviews", you're part of the problem.

>>81769496
>Baby Groot steals the show
movie confirmed shit

>>81769579
I love how following that logic, somewhere down the line, hundreds of critics were like "yeah, no even a paid weekend in a beautiful city can't get me to write a positive review about this trash" and then DC had no other choice but to invite them anyways because if they excluded everyone who wrote bad reviews about their movies, no one would come to their early screenings at all.

>>81769655
DC doesn't hold early screenings though. It's pretty much only Disney that to these "press exclusive" screenings weeks in advance so they can get the marketing machine up and going early. Nice try though.

Has the check cleared? Do I like it?

>>81769579
What a completely ridiculous claim.
There are hundreds of critics from many different countries and you're implying that they're paying for them to travel an all expenses paid trio to a country that is very expensive to travel to just to write a positive review for their movies, of which they release like about 10 a year?
You are also implying that of the all the big major studios who are worth many billions of dollars that Disney is the only one doing this.
You guys are fucking regards.

File: Screenshot_20170418-134218.png (540KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

540KB, 1080x1920px

>Steve Weintraub, editor of Collider

They invited literal Marvel shills to a special screening.

>>81769772
That's exactly what they're doing though. They get free vacations and luxurious press showings handed to them for free. God knows what's happening at the hotels they're staying at. Disney spends a lot of money on marketing. Bribing a few hundred critics is chump change for them. A worthy price to pay when you have impressionable retards looking up Rotten Tomatoes scores.

>>81769703
Are you an idiot? Of course they do. Every huge movie release has early screenings, that's not a Disney thing you nutjob. Obviously NOW DC has probably stopped doing them because their strategy has become the exact opposite of Marvel. Get as little information out as possible to trick people into watching their movies before bad word of mouth has a chance to spread.

File: marvel reviews.jpg (251KB, 1095x895px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 1095x895px

>>81769809
The line between critic, fanboy and shill have been blurred in the age of social media. After all, does anyone have faith in these retards after seeing Dr Strange? That's when my eyes were opened. These aren't reviews. They're glorified billboard ads.

>>81769496
>The word fun* is in all of those

YOU SAID THE WORD OF THE DAY

>>81769772
>you're implying that they're paying for them to travel an all expenses paid trio to a country that is very expensive to travel to just to write a positive review for their movies

Yes that's exactly what they are doing retard
You think these professional manbabys want to lose their early screening privilages?
Why don't they invite more respected, professional movies critics instead?

Why do you care if it's a good film or not? You pirate the rip anyway. You lose nothing. If you can be tricked into watching BvS and then defending it on a Brunei Etch-a-Sketch animation BBS you can be tricked into watching the Cookie Cutter #530: NOW WITH SMALL VERSIONS OF THINGS films.

You chucklefucks need to fuck off to /v/ with your company war bullshit.

>>81769829
Nope. DC and pretty much every other studio do these showings a few days before release in select theaters. BvS was like that.

Disney doesn't operate like that. They hold a single place to play a film (this time it was Paris) so they can invite all their buddy critics over, have them stay at luxurious hotels and meet the Disney PR people and then fly back home with a goodie bags. Your screaming and moaning just makes you all the more desperate that people are finding out.

>>81769809
Very cool

>>81769821
And what exactly is your logical reason to assume WB isn't doing something as easy as bribing a few hundred critics when the pay-off is so good? Especially considering WB is known for stepping as low as to bribe video game critics and youtubers for far less important projects.

>>81769878
How much is Disney paying you? You're not even hiding it anymore. Please say. I want the job aswell.

>>81769496
I wish film Gob died by dicks in the throat.

>>81769898
Can you source that time WB screened BvS three weeks in advance to journalists in France and invited them all over to stay in fancy hotels?

Oh wait, that is Disney with GoTG2. BvS was shown at regular theaters a few days before public opening.

Why do you care? If they said "It's a good film" you'd call them a shill anyway. If they explained why it was good you'd call them "shit taste" anyway. Shills and Anti-Shills (or The Other Corporate Shills Side as I like to call them) each have a script to follow.

>1 guy from press screening who didnt like it gives a rating -- showing there's no embargo up
>but other guys from press screening are vague about rather it was good or not and give no ratings -- ensuring majorly positive buzz is created

Geez what could it mean?

>>81769884
But the fact that reviewers are bribed by companies is common knowledge you dimwit. The only people trying to suppress that information are DC fanboys pretending that WB is somehow different than all those other corporations and only makes movies out of some altrustic sense of spreading kino throughout the world and they don't care about marketing and making money at all.

>>81769909
>insults DC
>WAAAH
>but also insults Marvel
>NO HE'S A SHILL! EVERYBODY IS A SHILL BUT MY DCHADS

Both are shit, fuck off you mong, enjoy your ban.

>>81769929
How many times have you posted that now? You're just feeding into the conspiracy that Disney shills are here doing PR for their favorite company.

>>81769928
So the only way to bribe critics is to send them to fancy hotels in France?

>>81769945
So where did WB invite journalists three weeks in advance to an exclusiive screening for BvS? You still haven't provided a source and you're still leaking all that Disney butthurt.

>>81769983
That's a very effective way of doing it. Just look at all these retard "critics" who took the obvious bribe of a free vacation only to kiss Disney's ass on social media.

>>81769928
>BvS was shown at regular theaters a few days before public opening.
All movies that the company know is going to suck or bomb do this. They also release on all markets the same day.

File: bought reviews.jpg (211KB, 732x960px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 732x960px

OH NO NOT ME

>>81770016
Wow, you really uncovered some serious conspiracy here. How long have Disney been doing this? Surely there was also an advanced screening for GotG1, where they sent critics to free vacations across the globe, right? Otherwise, how could it possibly have gotten such good reviews?

>>81770028
A few days before official opening is industry standard.

A few weeks before with an exclusive press screening where they get a free trip isn't industry standard. It's Disney standard. Which also explains a lot of things given how Disney films are "reviewed".

>>81770070
I don't have a source on what transcribed with GoTG. But I do know what's happening now, and that is Disney inviting these self-styled critics on exclusive press screenings with a free trip and hotel visits. It's an elaborate bribe coated with routine procedures.

>>81769939
Can someone explain this? How come the guy who didnt like it gave a rating, but the guys who apparently did like it (or at least thought it was "fun XD") gave no rating?

>>81769821
You niggers realise that many of these studios have parent companies who own media outlets and therefore critics who write movie reviews.
There are conflicts of interest in your idiotic claim.

>>81770116
Self censored? There's no embargo that I heard of.

>>81770078
not for highly anticipated huge movie releases. DC is forced to do it a few days before release because their marketing strategy is relying on uninformed consumers. That's also why DC movies always have such a huge drop-off in box office numbers from weekend 1 to weekend 2

>>81769496
>the most successful film franchise in cinema history needs paid shills and doesnt have any real fans

sure thing DCuck

>>81770154
>movie is 3 weeks away from official release
>select handful of people saw it at an early screening
>no embargo

Are you stupid? Of course there's an embargo.

File: le reddit humor.webm (2MB, 334x484px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 334x484px

>>81769496
>Don't think I've heard so much laughter at a press screening
This is just feeding into the peer pressure surrounding Marvel movies - if you're not laughing, there's something wrong with you. Look at all these people having fun. Don't you want to fit in and also have fun? Classic psychology.

>For many, it will become their new favorite Marvel movie
Already telling you what to think instead of them saying what they think. More of same as described earlier.

>I am Groot.
This is straight up fanboyism and further feeds into the whole cult-like obsession with Marvel consumption.

GoTG is an awful movie for kids and seeing these adults pretend like it changed their lives is not only sad but also fake and forced.

>>81770167
>not for highly anticipated huge movie releases
What films have had 3 weeks advanced press screenings outside of Disney films? Enlighten me.

It also scored a 100 to test screeners so expect more good praise for it.

>>81770244
I'm glad they were able to focus test it to the point where it's so inoffensive that they reached 100% approval.

State of modern filmmaking.

>>81769850
At this point, I really think Disney is holding them by the balls.

If they dare speak against Disney, they gonn get blacklisted yo.

Going against Disney = career suicide

>>81770201
I didn't hear it on collider so post a sourse

>>81770036
>WAAAAAH WHY DO PEOPLE LIKE THIS ACTUALLY GOOD MOVIE MORE THAN MY "ALL WOMEN ARE LITERALLY SATAN" MOVIE?!

>>81770279
Is this bait?

>>81769496
So, you went right to panic mode and had an autistic outburst on an anime argument board.

Relax man, you'll need this energy for the Rotten tomatoes rebuke campaign when it hit 90% and you keep hearing the word 'fun'.

wtf? i hate everything now

>>81770244
You dont even know what a test screener is you idiot. Shut the hull up!

>>81770292
Are you actually defending those comments as professional and in line with what critics should be saying on social media? It's pure fanboyism and it also explains the RT score as you mentioned.

How does Drax call Star Lord in the original? In my country it's "Star Shit".

Not related to company wars but I genuinely can't understand how this stuff is funny.

>>81769809
Collider have no credibility, i didn't even need the Nerds Crew to show me that.

>>81770311
Ok the focus group of normies.

>>81769496
>Drax is a hoot. Baby Groot steals the show

Movies make me want to be dead.

Man DCfriends are really having another breakdown it seems.

dude wtf im insecure that im not normal lmao

>>81770292
>implying it will go below 92%
Fucking DCucks

>>81769496
Do DC fans actually believe this or is it just more of a mental exercise?

Because this shit is ridiculous.

>>81770396
Are you saying the quotes in OP are fake and these people aren't in fact kissing corporate ass for having a free vacation paid for them?

>>81769496
Why is "fun" the standard for a good film whenever it comes to Marvel cbms?

>>81770368
>>81770396
They just can't handle the fact that people like good movies

It's sad really

>>81770393
**updoots**

>>81770396
>>81770382
>>81770368
Look who logged into their Mickey Mouse Funhouse accounts

>>81769496
Normally I'd agree with you and these reviewers are shit
But Guardians of the Galaxy is one of only 4 marvel films I don't shit on. Mainly because I don't see it as a superhero film and it felt kinda like what star wars for a new generation should be

I genuinely loved it. So I'm excited for vol.2.
It's a shame that anything actually good from disney's cesspit will forever be overlooked due to unprofessional critics stroking disney's dick in the least subtle way possible. But hey, that's life
I like to think guardians will stand the test of time compared to the rest just because it's so unconnected to the rest of the mcu but who knows?

>>81770417
Vocabulary is limited because colorful and fun are the only words you can use to describe them accurately.

>>81770413
Or maybe, just maybe they actually really enjoyed the movie

I know that's such a hard concept for you DC retards to grasp

>>81770445
Liking a movie and explicitly shilling it after a free vacation isn't the same.

>DC fans already on panic mode

I hope "Wonder Woman" is good. You guys deserve a win.

Is there more to this than fart jokes, baby Groot and colors?

>>81770459
>Disney shill already seeing ghosts behind every post
Maybe people are just fed up with this shitty HYPE culture regarding critics? Too many unprofessional bloggers with too much influence and too easy to influence.

>>81770452
Yes they are so why is it so hard for you to tell the difference?

>>81770459
Hope and DC don't belong anywhere near eachother

File: 8f4c9e10fc4355a7cbe76aebf84c9c07.jpg (14KB, 126x56px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 126x56px

>>81769496
REMINDER THAT THE REVIEW EMBARGO IS DOWN

ANY OF THESE PEOPLE COULD GIVE A RATING OR CALL IT "great" OR "good" OR "amazing" OR "fantastic" BUT NONE DO

MEANWHILE THE ONE NEGATIVE REACTION SO FAR ACTUALLY GIVES A RATING AND CALLS IT "not as good"

WHAT MOTIVATES THIS BEHAVIOR: THAT THE ONLY ACTUAL REVIEW IS NEGATIVE AND ALL OTHER REACTIONS FROM THESE ADVANCE SCREENING BIG WEBSITE CRITICS ARE "You're gonna laugh so hard!" "You're gonna get so emotional!" "You're gonna have fun!" "You're gonna find so many Easter Eggs!" "You're gonna be so surprised!" AS IF THEYRE TRYING TO GET YOU TO WATCH THE MOVIE INSTEAD OF JUST GIVING THEIR RATING OF RATHER IT WAS GOOD OR NOT

CAN YOU PEOPLE REALLY NOT SEE THROUGH THIS SHILL BULLSHIT

>>81770483
So do you think what OP is displaying is critique or blatant shilling? Bear in mind, this is after a luxurious trip to France with free Hotel visits and goody bags included.

>>81770317
Defending them as professionals? I've read reviews by those people before, they tend to speak only in the most popular and current 'nerd talk', they're poor quality. My point was at the first sign of positive messaging from reviewers, professional or not, we get a rebuke campaign right away. I bored with the Marvel vs DC shit, they're all the same anyway and caring about it this much, to make this OP, is embarrassing.

>>81770505
We can see. It's just Mouseshills desperately trying to damage control their obvious bribe tactics.

File: gotg.jpg (85KB, 916x337px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 916x337px

You keep saying the critics went to France for the screening, but what's your source?

Because looking at some of the reactions, the screening happened in LA.

>>81770505
>>81770535
same fagging

>>81770566
**updoots**

I dunno if amyone ever told you this OP, but when people say things are fun, it usually means they had a good time and enjoyed themselves.

Or I dunno, maybe in your autism councilling sessions people do say 'This was fun, it was awful'.

Also you're crying bitch tears about the artistic merit of capeshit designed to sell toys to kids. So there's that too.

>>81770596
I think OP has many dates where it ends with the girl killing herself.

>>81770596
Are film reviewers supposed to share "How fun a time they had XD" or review the fucking film

File: shills.jpg (238KB, 1198x708px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 1198x708px

ALL AROUND ME ARE FAMILIAR SHILLING, BOUGHT OUT FACES

>>81770676
doesn't twitter has a character limit. to short for a review.

File: 1492518475849.png (27KB, 497x204px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 497x204px

>>81770701
Didnt stop him

I'm genuinely concerned for you OP, it seems very unhealthy to be so paranoid and angry every time a Marvel movie gets positive reactions.

You might want to talk to a therapist about it, it's not normal to be so invested in superhero movies.

>>81770670
Having fun at the cinema is an invalid statement for a reviewer to make? Christ, you're too far gone mate. Take it as an early indication, then listen to the only reviewer that should matter to you, which is yourself.

>>81770733
>sneider
You're not fooling anyone Zack

>>81769496
you are just giving the movie more exposure and attention
stop

>>81769618
>Patreon

>>81770733
That's a review if you have ADD. Fuck there use to be a tv show that reviewed movies.

>>81770750
So you're telling me to watch the film myself? Hahahaha, how much should I pay for the ticket

>>81770782
You're getting really backed into a corner shill

>>81770515
Critics get that kind of shit all the time they aren't going to be impressed just because it's Disney doing it

Face it it's just a good movie

>>81770822
You did it again

Point out one of those reactions calling it a good movie or anything close

>>81770812
I bet you only read the blurbs in rotten tomatoes and not the articles.
hell do you watch all of a RLM review those are 20 to 30 minutes.

>>81770822
You talk as if these guys aren't broke bloggers writing for irrelevant online sites.

Ya ya ya

kys

OP, why aren't you responding to this post? >>81770563

File: jlbanner.jpg (375KB, 958x340px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 958x340px

>>81769618
instead of that "le gritty dark" aesthetic they went for they should've gone for that idealistic, shiny almost sci-fi/futuristic aesthetic of the animated shows and movies DC creates

that's what i want to see in a superman film especially, i don't want to see fucking afghanistan and the fucking himalayas, i want to see shiny, bright, futuristic metropolis

>>81770911
OP here, I made no such claims
How about you actually reply to people that made those claims, you illiterate punk

>>81770670

Considering all reviews are subjective and the very nature of the industry is very 'kiss ass or starve', they could say the film made them fart rainbow sprinkles for all I care.

If you need reviewers to form an opinion of a film for you before the film is even out, then you're probably a huge faggot anyway. It's a fucking movie, not a Bugatti Veyron. Just go see it and form your own opinion, or wait till it gets pirated and do it then.

Don't screech at reviewers 'CONFIRM MY ALREADY SOLIDIFIED BIASES', those sad bastards have to eat like the rest of us, if they choose to eat out of Disney's pocket then go for it.

People act like reviewers are supposed to be the gatekeepers of high art, when in fact all they are doing is giving you their opinion. And lets face it, you contrarian fuck will argue shit is clay whatever they say anyway

>GotG2 comes out
>It's a steaming turd
>KINO KINO KINO KINO KINO KINO AM I COOL YET?

>>81769618
Where's X-men?
>Fun
>Serious
They can do both

>>81770964
Sure you didn't OP.

>>81770881
They may be but they still get to go to the press screenings and get all the free shit the studios give out

>>81770997
>Where's X-men
Wolverine killed the franchise no one cares about the x-men.

>>81770786
I honestly don't know what this comment means.

>>81770396
Is just shitposting.
I hope

>>81770476
Holy moly super salty cuck stop

>>81770244
But what the clickbait titles don't tell you is that the test screenings were only shown to family and friends of the cast/crew. Of course they're going to say they like it

I don't think I've ever read a review before seeing a movie.

>>81770505
Damn NO ONE can refute this

Why didnt the other critics give ratings if they enjoyed it so much?

>>81771327
I never read reviews either, i could care less what they think about a movie

It's sad how they shape peoples opinions though, like for example i loved warcraft and it flopped in USA because americans are sheep

thank goodness for China, thanks to them i might get a sequel

>>81771376
Honestly pretty happy to see upswing in China. American audience is too easily swayed by the media. Chinks don't care. They just go see everything that looks cool.

File: 1492494202766.jpg (118KB, 624x954px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 624x954px

>>81770733
A FUCKING NUMALE HAHA

>pretend to be a contrarian DCuck for so long you start getting legitimately triggered by anything and everything Marvel
Such a sad existence. /tv/ wasn't always this shitty.

>>81771564
And so the shills hunt for detractors begin.

>>81770396
There's one from /v/ that's serious. Check out the posting time for all the capeshit threads up right now. Most of them are made in the same hour/2

>>81771432
Like Transformers.

>>81771432
Daily reminder that BvS had a low as fuck Chinese opening

File: 1458738652325.jpg (21KB, 548x398px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 548x398px

>>81769496

>>81770105
You do mean transpired, not transcribed

File: 1492266064807.jpg (103KB, 675x465px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 675x465px

>>81771594
I don't know why people do this it's so much better being on the winning side

>>81769496

I love 70s and 80s music but I always cringe at "dude remember this?" moments in movies, or playing the S H I T out of period music to set the tone of the era.

If a film is set in the 80s then sure, have Madonna playibg in the background on a radio in a scene or something but I don't need to hear the decades greatest hits.

The movie isn't even out yet and they're already this mad, oh boy.

IS IT GONNA FLOP?

>>81771891
I don't know how anyone can call themselves winners after being fed with Marvel's garbage for more than a decade. Sure you win.

File: smh.png (137KB, 853x194px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 853x194px

>>81771891
You're really still at it huh

>>81770505
>still no arguments against this

Damn really made me think

>>81772078
>8 months is the same as 5 days
DCucks really are as retarded as they seem.

>>81772231
First trailers always get more views than later trailers. Switch up your argument already shill

>>81771344
You're grasping at straws dcfag.

File: JL BTFO for like the 50th time.png (83KB, 649x165px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 649x165px

>>81772078
oh no we have to wait another day or two to beat your 8 month total

>>81772263
But >>81772078 IS the first Justice League trailer, fuckwit. It's been out for 8 months already, whereas the Thor 3 trailer has only been out for 5 days as of that screenshot.
>>81772149
>reviews are bullshit! they dont mean anything! critics dont know what their talking about!
>guys, reviews mean everything! lets laugh at marlel because of these zero reviews!

>>81772363
Wow your brain got reallly confused

Let me go slower:

Trailers for A movie (singular, not comparative) decrease in views as more are released

The first Thor trailer will have more views than the second Thor trailer. Yet in that image, there is a comparison between the 4th Wonder Woman trailer, the 2nd Justice League trailer and the 1st Thor trailer

Moreover, let us not even acknowledge how trailers are disseminated and reposted all over YouTube, such in that example given where an unofficial upload of the Justice League trailer has 40 million views. Limiting the scope of a meme image to the official channels only like that poster did is simply ridiculous

>>81772465
Why are Mouseshills such dishonest pigs bros?

>>81772465
But no one added up all the views on all the different uploads of the Thor trailer, you desperate fucking sperglord.

>>81772525
Show me how much the alternate uploads have on Thor.

>>81772594
First of all, why the fuck would I do that? You didn't do the same for Justice League. Second, how the fuck is that at all relevant?

>>81769809
I really loved these tweets.

>>81769496
I'm not going to be fooled again

Too much positive review is just dishonesty

>>81769496
Wow, you must be some expert here?

>>81769579
How would this work? How much would it cost to give room and board for hundreds of critics to watch and review multiple movies worldwide every single year? And who the fuck would pay for it? It doesnt make any sense

>>81770926
this so much...

>THIS IS REDDIT

THIS IS MEMES

>THIS IS REDDIT

THIS IS MEMES!!!

File: 1453584132958.jpg (18KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 320x180px

>reviews for GotG 2 start coming out
>All of a sudden a lot of threads smearing GotG and Marvel start being made

coincidence?

>>81775201
I guess it must be shit or something.

>>81770219
It's all so fucking transparent.

>>81771213
It's not. These people are completely serious.

>>81769496
I used to work as a professional shill until I found a real job. I couldn't stand shilling, but some of the people there really enjoyed it. Most of the time shills are easy to detect, and spotting them becomes even easier after you've worked as one.

>>81770036
LOOK AT THE FUCKING RATING YOU PLEB
CIVIL WAR GOT 7.6/10 GONE GIRL GOT 9/10

Marvellads aint shit

>>81769643
If you care about any of that, you're part of the problem.

File: 1466581397317.jpg (64KB, 692x558px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 692x558px

>>81769850
I am not shitposting, I cant fucking express enough how little I give a shit about some idiot on rotten tomatoes sharing their worthless opinion. I cant imagine a reality where I care enough to pretend to be mad about it on /tv/, where I care enough to make shitty meme pictures in photoshop, you have problems. Grow the fuck up.

>>81769821
>>81769870
Proof or gtfo

>>81769952
>enjoy your ban.

??