Search Results
7/1/2025, 5:24:42 AM
>>149533324
>Mahomes outclassed him
Pure cope from zoomers who didn't actually watch the game. The Patriots had
>twice as many first downs
>more than double the time of possession
>99 more total passing yards because Mahomes took 4 sacks playing heroball and Brady took 0
>20 passing first downs to 11 for the Chiefs
>a 68% 3rd down conversion rate to 44% for the Chiefs
>14 more completions, 94 more plays run and 234 more yards of total offense
The Chiefs defenders were making mental mistakes at the end and couldn't make a stand in OT because Brady methodically wore them down until they were ready to just roll over. Double the time of possession is insane. Patriots honestly should have won by 20
>Mahomes outclassed him
Pure cope from zoomers who didn't actually watch the game. The Patriots had
>twice as many first downs
>more than double the time of possession
>99 more total passing yards because Mahomes took 4 sacks playing heroball and Brady took 0
>20 passing first downs to 11 for the Chiefs
>a 68% 3rd down conversion rate to 44% for the Chiefs
>14 more completions, 94 more plays run and 234 more yards of total offense
The Chiefs defenders were making mental mistakes at the end and couldn't make a stand in OT because Brady methodically wore them down until they were ready to just roll over. Double the time of possession is insane. Patriots honestly should have won by 20
6/25/2025, 9:54:26 PM
>>211974862
>Snyder didn’t make those two movies.
He was executive producer, oversaw the plot and casting, and depending on who you choose to believe he may have ghost directed a *lot* of WW.
Both of the sequels to those films were directed by the same people who made the first films, so why did they both go to shit after the Whedoning? If Patty Jenkins was 100% responsible for Wonder Woman's success how did she suddenly become a grossly incompetent retard when it was time to make WW2?
And I'll reiterate, a film making "only" $900 million in 2016 is only a problem relative to expectations. Screeching about every other film that made more than that doesn't suddenly make BVS a flop. If you want to talk about Ant-Man, Quantumania didn't even make $500 mil. That's what an actual underperforming film looks like. Snyder got a B-minus instead of an A+ and you're acting like it was an F. It was everything after his that was the outright failure and that's not a coincidence.
And as for
>Why would WB continue to dump millions of dollars into something that clearly was not working for the general audience (again, historic second weekend drop)?
A better question is why wouldn't you just give Snyder the $30 or so mil he needed to finish his cut of Justice League instead of giving Whedon 2 or 3 times that much to reshoot half the film? You know what was "clearly was not working for the general audience?" Every movie post-Snyder which all did way, way, waaaaaaay worse than BVS did.
Again, it's not really debatable. We can quantify the pre-and post Snyder eras and it's a clear, dischotomoust divison
With Snyder:
>MOS (moderate success)
>Wonder woman (irrefutable success)
>Aquaman (huge fucking success)
>BVS (moderate success and yes, it is. There's no world where $100 million in profit is a failure despite your butthurt)
Post -Snyder:
>Justice League (failure)
>WW2 (failure)
>Shazam 2 (failure)
>Aquaman 2 (moderate failure)
>Flash (huge, enormous, cataclysmic failure)
>Snyder didn’t make those two movies.
He was executive producer, oversaw the plot and casting, and depending on who you choose to believe he may have ghost directed a *lot* of WW.
Both of the sequels to those films were directed by the same people who made the first films, so why did they both go to shit after the Whedoning? If Patty Jenkins was 100% responsible for Wonder Woman's success how did she suddenly become a grossly incompetent retard when it was time to make WW2?
And I'll reiterate, a film making "only" $900 million in 2016 is only a problem relative to expectations. Screeching about every other film that made more than that doesn't suddenly make BVS a flop. If you want to talk about Ant-Man, Quantumania didn't even make $500 mil. That's what an actual underperforming film looks like. Snyder got a B-minus instead of an A+ and you're acting like it was an F. It was everything after his that was the outright failure and that's not a coincidence.
And as for
>Why would WB continue to dump millions of dollars into something that clearly was not working for the general audience (again, historic second weekend drop)?
A better question is why wouldn't you just give Snyder the $30 or so mil he needed to finish his cut of Justice League instead of giving Whedon 2 or 3 times that much to reshoot half the film? You know what was "clearly was not working for the general audience?" Every movie post-Snyder which all did way, way, waaaaaaay worse than BVS did.
Again, it's not really debatable. We can quantify the pre-and post Snyder eras and it's a clear, dischotomoust divison
With Snyder:
>MOS (moderate success)
>Wonder woman (irrefutable success)
>Aquaman (huge fucking success)
>BVS (moderate success and yes, it is. There's no world where $100 million in profit is a failure despite your butthurt)
Post -Snyder:
>Justice League (failure)
>WW2 (failure)
>Shazam 2 (failure)
>Aquaman 2 (moderate failure)
>Flash (huge, enormous, cataclysmic failure)
Page 1