
Critical Drinker's review of Lanterns was so stupid
And I'm putting a spoiler tag so not to be an asshole.

And I'm putting a spoiler tag so not to be an asshole.
Hello everybody, hello everybody
just a mod here telling all y'all if you absolutely HAVE TO POST about the hit new DC Studios/HBO original series Lanterns to please please PLEASE mark it a spoiler. it's a good thing I stole a family member's hbomax subscription so I could stay caught up, but other awesome members aren't so lucky.
most of your are lazy ragebait that break rule 5 anyway so make sure you put in a little effort in pls <3
Be sure to definitely put down that they are not mad.
I would its the former (BvS) negative reception alone is the root of all the issue
So I saw this tweet earlier and it inspired me to do some research. I never really bothered with any of the Zack Snyder DC movies 'cause I was kind of bored with the superhero genre at that point and Man of Steel just looked too grey. I heard some mediocre reviews from critics and that they weren't financially successful, but I didn't realize how bad. I decided to compare the world box office returns and rotten tomatoes scores of "first phase" DCEU properties and Marvel films releasing around the same time.
The differences were stark.
Man of Steel released in 2013, it's worldwide box office was $670.1 million and Rotten Tomatoes has it at a 56% critics score and 75% audience score.
That same year Iron Man 3 earned $1.21 billion worldwide and Rotten Tomatoes has it at a 79% Critic Score and 78% Audience Score. Also that same year, Thor: The Dark World earned a worldwide box office of $644.6 million and has a 64% Critic Score and 74% Audience Score on RT.
So Snyder's Superman movie, based on one of the most recognizable superhero characters on earth, was broadly in the same bracket as Thor. Now while I like Thor, I don't really think he's "Superman" tier.
Batman v Superman released in 2016, its worldwide box office was $874.36 million, RT has it at a 28% critic score and a 63% audience score.
That same year Marvel released Captain America: Civil War with a worldwide box office of $1.15 billion, RT has it at a 90% critic score and an 89% audience score. Marvel also released Doctor Strange with a worldwide box office of $676 million and RT scores of 89% critics and 86% audience.
Now if we're counting theatrical releases (yeah yeah, "muh theatrical Justice League wasn't Zack Snyder's vision) we've got Justice League with a worldwide Box Office of $661 million. Its RT score puts critics at 39% and audiences at 66%
Competing with Justice League was a slate of Marvel films which literally all outperformed it.
Guardians of The Galaxy Vol. 2 made $869 million, Spider-Man: Homecoming made $878 million, and Thor: Ragnarok made $850 million. All three of them had Rotten Tomatoes critic and audience scores at or near 90%!
I checked out Suicide Squad which has a poor RT rating from critics and audiences, bizarrely it made $749 million worldwide. Wonder Woman seems to have been the only DC product that was both a financial and critical success. EDIT: I was reminded that Aquaman actually broke the billion dollar ceiling with $1.58 Billion making it the most successful DC film for... reasons, I guess.
I guess an open question for the subreddit is: are the other communities that have a completely imaginary idea for how popular/successful an IP is? Or like, people who've just completely deluded themselves into thinking that a flop was actually a success? Morbius posters not withstanding.