>The positive rewievs aint shi-

>"El Gato"
I don't trust brazilians

>>212653185 (OP)
Based Tyler G

>>212653185 (OP)
Oh no no no
AHAHAHAHA

>>212653185 (OP)
You'd think the marketers would be smart enough not to try this kind of shit because all that's required to the house of cards to collapse is one or a few people sharing it.

It's all understood by the subtext anyway.

>>212653185 (OP)
Tyler Goopta can't read

>>212653185 (OP)
>social posts
So you can tweet that it sucks ass with a selfie of you in the theater and it'd be good to go?

>>212653185 (OP)
>is suggested to write a review in order for the event to be successful
>spergs out and thinks it has anything to do with the quality of his opinion
That's Jeets for you. Can't fucking read.

>>212653185 (OP)
>the email tells the person that they must disclose they were given a ticket
What a devilish covert operation they're running!

>>212654673
This has always been how film reviews worked, quite openly

>>212654721
>doesn't understand jewish doublespeak
You have much to learn

>>212653185 (OP)
Snyderjeets getting desperate.

>>212654783
Doesn't change the fact that it's against the law.

>>212654823
>everything is doublespeak
They suggested he write a review so the event would gain publicity.
Do it or don't.
What is this whiny shit?

>>212654980
the Pic makes no mention of a review

>>212654980
It being against the law only matters if you can prove the connection between the two. Merely not getting any more invitations after making a negative review is not going to be accepted as proof.

>>212654823
He knows exactly what he's doing, anon.

>>212655042
Are all Gunnbots this retarded?

>>212655070
My point is that it's illegal. Whether the case is strong enough to warrant prosecution is a different matter entirely.

>>212655085
look at the OP pic, dummy

kindness is punk rock

>>212653185 (OP)
Where does it say you have to write a good review?

>>212655201
In the
>I hope you aren't autistic enough to understand what's being implied but we can't say outright
part

>>212655261
There's nothing of the kind in there, it's a basic email saying you're invited to an early screening which are normally offered to reviewers, if you talk about it after please don't share movie spoilers. That seems exceptionally standard, and you have to have a massive chip on your shoulder to so aggressively misread that.

>>212653185 (OP)
>giving me your wallet is not required but greatly appreciated as it helps me not pull the trigger
Extreme example but it's basically the same level of gaslighting. You're not helping yourself, you're helping US.

>>212654721
It's literally fine.
>>212654823
That's not what doublespeak means, ffffffffffffffffaggot

>>212655363
>Ree my right throw out spoilers

>>212655803
WB really fucked up by releasing this during peak Orange reign

>>212655962
i think it might work to it's benefit

>>212656172
>>212655962
>>212655838
>>212655803
>>212655676
>>212655559
Superman saves Palestine. I love him.

>>212655803
kek

>>212656209
this but unironically

>we're inviting you to this event to raise awareness for the movie. Say anything you want but if you're not gonna say anything we'd rather pick others
>OMG THEY ARE FORCING YOU TO WRITE POSITIVE REVIEWS RIGGED OH MY GOD THEY DESPERATE SHILLS FREEDOM OF THE PRESS DCISOVERPARTY

>>212653185 (OP)
what seems to be the problem?

>what do you mean if I'm a whiny fag at the party I won't be invited to the next party???

>>212657124
>Muh strawman
Fag, this is not a party, but a corporate event paid for by WB in order to shill their shitty film. You are helping them shill and not even being paid for it. Pathetic.