Female Reviewer Gets Attacked for Avengers Review

118 Comments

• | Reply

• Shaun | March 12, 2013 2:57 AMReply

  I really like Joss Whedon, but the reality is that "The Avengers" was not a particularly good movie. It was not bad, but it certainly wasn't the second coming of Christ that many fans make it out to be. Indeed, in my view, it doesn't really hold together and the final battle becomes downright boring after a while. Plus, that is the most incompetent alien invasion I've ever seen. It looks like Thanos hired himself the space equivalent of the Hell's Angels to invade Earth - i.e., the most disorganized group of thugs he could find. Anyway, hopefully, Whedon will get it better the second time around. For now, I'll predict that, eventually, when the euphoria wears off, people will be able to make a more honest assessment of the movie and realize that it's not that great.

• ebonytheboss | January 23, 2013 1:34 PMReply

  Wow im glad i dont come here cause all yu are nuts. I also hated the movie its was crap! and twilght is crap too! the comic fan boys need to get a life! Bye trolls!

• Elmo | January 12, 2013 5:18 PMReply

  Well, feminists never listen to debate and logic testing their feminism so I guess that's why they are hated.

• Bigger Brother | January 13, 2013 8:30 PM

  Good point ELMO. Logic and reasoned argument are alien to feminism. Which is why Andrew Richards had such a great time on this blog!

• Eileen | January 12, 2013 11:43 PM

  Wow, did you just wake up out of a cryogenic slumber? It's been a year, dude. The discussion is over.

• Boosra | November 9, 2012 12:55 PMReply

  Who cares what review she gave Avengers. Avengers a better than average piece of super- hero crap - anyone who would get in the least excited about it is a cretin.
  
  She did, however, give a bad review to Pan's Labyrinth - which is a crime so heinous that she deserves all this abuse she is getting from the comic-book idiots.

• CPB | November 9, 2012 9:57 PM

  Uh, nope! I loved Pan's Labyrinth, but just because someone has a different point of view does not mean they deserve

• Cliff | August 12, 2012 3:14 PMReply

  Lol I read her review , lame no charachter development . What about Thor , Iron Man , Iron Man 2 , Captian America The 1st Avenger ,The Incredible Hulk. If you look at Avengers as just one film your a fool man or woman , its a sequel of epic proportions . I've never seen it done before . Also to those people who say it's immature lmfao Duhhh!!!! It's a film about SUPER HEROS !!! Funny/Stupid one liners . Explosions , Crazy Monsters , Unbelieveable Villians , You know kids stuff!! If your one of those people who grew up to fast or doesn't remember what its like to be a kid , at least at the movies then sucks to be you .

• Paul | July 27, 2012 12:09 PMReply

  I thought The Avengers was immature crap, full of mindless explosions, dull characters and Whedon's usual brand of juvenile dialogue. I am amazed that their weren't more negative reviews.

• rawrar | July 25, 2012 7:57 AMReply

  You know I'll start by saying that I loved the avengers, I thought it was an amazing movie, however I'm surprised there aren't more negative reveiws around. It's strange because when you finally do find a negative review its about stupid things like it being a movie made for males... I found it an amazing epic movie but if you sit back and really think about its story its so incredibly non-existent. No one noticed this because of the snarky characters and the awesome effects and awesome battle scenes and everything being awesome so I didn't really notice the done a million times just about non-existent story until I thought about it later, however I thought that reveiwers always seem to be hard on stuff so I asumed that they would be hard on the avengers for it's story, and I'm surprised they were not...

• Rawrar | July 25, 2012 8:02 AM

  Oh and by story I mean plot...

• Sarah | July 20, 2012 11:17 AMReply

  Regardless of whether this is exclusively male entertainment or not (it's not of course), sexism is not justified, any more than racism or homophobia would be. It doesn't matter whether the target annoys you, whether you feel 'provoked' ( using whatever spurious definition of provocation you adhere to) or whether they are sexist too: you are accountable for your own actions and sexism is not okay. Nor is it okay to try to prevent other people's right to free expression. That would make you a one-party fascist ideologue (which is what sexists are).

• CPB | November 9, 2012 10:04 PM

  Andrew, your desire to equate nepotism with sexism in an effort to dismiss the sexist responses to the reviewer is utter bulls---t; right down there with your elitist attitude towards gender studies. Creating a strawman argument to place men and, by extension, yourself in the victim role is pitiable. There is nothing more frustrating than a man's desire to dismiss sexism because discussing the topic makes them feel icky. Ugh....

• Andrew Richards | July 22, 2012 6:38 AM

  And yet Sarah, noone has claimed that it is SOLELY male entertainment except for those trying to push the utterly flawed and anachronistic Patriarchal model (before you claim it isn't, I suggest reading the works of more enlightened modern gender academics who explore the notions of hegemonic and subordinate masculinities and correctly accuse the Patrairchal model of depriving women of agency).
  
  The reality is that Ms Nicholson 's review was at best incompetent, due to her inability to correctly name a key figure in the Marvel Universe - however given her track record for producing contrary review, most likely trolling.
  
  When people troll, they usually press buttons and people snap. Certainly there were misogynistic comments focused on her fertility, but then similar comments are usually made of men in prominent positions who display complete incompetence - where their sexual desireability is turned into a slur. How often do accusations of nepotism show up against incompetent men? The "daddy got him the job slur" is merely the flip side of the "she slept her way into the job" slur; just as male power being the basis of male desirability is the flip side of physical attractiveness and fertility being the basis of female desirability.
  
  The reality is that such an argument opens a massive can of worms in terms of social constructs and one which society currently lacks the enlightened, egalitarian understanding of gender to properly explore.

• Ed P | May 17, 2012 10:04 PMReply

  I think every one of you is a hatefull bitch. Good night.

• James | May 16, 2012 9:32 PMReply

  "I think it would be great for the guys who are apologizing to Amy to get on the site and call their fellow commenters out on their crap. This has got to stop."........ I think what really has to stop are these unmonitered, anonymous comment boards. Ignorance should have a price.

• Ian Grey | May 14, 2012 12:11 PMReply

  Hi. Well, this sucks, of course. I call it the 'the full Diablo' which is in reference to when I had the nerve to, with all seriousness defend Diablo Cody's JENNIFER's BODY which yeah, had problems but also had all kinds of Whedon-y fun ideas about genre-play and its own ideas about messing with gender--
  
  --which caused males to go absolutely INSANE. We're talking Megan Fox decapitation fantasies, Diablo Cody death scenarios, guys calling Cody names that never existed until I wrote this.
  
  Basically, it was about how 'dare I' betray my gender and support a [fill in woman-hate obscenity] like Cody???
  
  Anyway--THE AVENGERS is out and I found *critics* not even mentioning Black Widow or pretending she was a total nothing--'the full Diablo' in passive aggressive form! It's like racism in the age of Obama. Mostly, the hate monkeys keep to themselves until something triggers them. You can read the piece here. http://blogs.indiewire.com/pressplay/grey-matters-black-widow-spins-a-web-around-the-avengers

• Andrew Richards | June 18, 2012 11:19 AM

  You're reaching here. The problem is that unlike, say Wonder Woman in JLA, Black Widow is not only a second tier character, but has only recently been a prominent Avenger with the formation of Secret Avengers. Had they gone with say, Janet Van Dyke (aka the Wasp), or even Wanda Maximoff (aka the Scarlett Witch) then there's alot more history and attachment to those characters, especially the Scarlett Witch for example.
  
  Black Widow was handled well, but the fact is that when you look at the issue from a gender neutral perspective; there were simply other characters which people were more looking forward to seeing on the big screen- including the other 5 Avengers, who were all Avengers before Black Widow was. In fact to bring gender back into the equation, I've heard several Avengers fans point out that they're hoping Ant-Man and the Wasp will be in the next. Personally I'd love to see Carol Danvers if the next one turns out to be about the Infinity Gauntlet and involves Thanos (quite frankly, the team will need her level of power - along with a pre-insane Sentry for that matter). And that's the thing. Johansen did an amazing job of bringing depth to the character, but she's simply not as popular as other characters, including female characters. Is it right that her performance gets glossed over? Definitely not and I personally loved the depth the character was given without resorting to minutes of exposition for the sake of it. But the fact it that people simply aren't as attached to her as other characters in this movie.
  
  That's ignoring 2 not so little words: Civil War. Ever since that even, where Cap and Iron Man literally went to war against each other over superhero registration, there's been an anticipation to see how their different perspectives would clash and play out on screen. Then you have the fact that the movie is loosely based on Avengers Vol 1 Issue 1 and so there was going to be interest on how the Thor/Loki dynamic plays out.
  
  Then there's Hulk which people were conscious of because of how poorly he'd been handled in the last 2 movie incarnations and who against all odds was nailed.
  
  Against that, Black Widow didn't stand a chance and the only reason Hawkeye got any props was because he was evil for half the movie. In short, you're reaching trying to turn Black Widow's coverage into a gender issue.

• KittyWrangler | May 9, 2012 6:40 PMReply

  Since Melissa Silverstein cares about comments and is perturbed to see a void where outrage should be, I'm just de-lurking to say these comments are outrageous(ly funny, in an embarrassing way) and I enjoyed this post. Why point out that yet ANOTHER misogynist internet pile-on happened? Well, when people use misogyny to silence someone (however stupid their review is or isn't), ignoring it gives a tacit ok and pointing it out does make a real difference, that's why. I appreciate it and I know I'm not alone. Everyone knows these "go make a sammich" comments are the trollish dregs of the internet but unfortunately they are a really effective silencing tactic that actually makes a difference to hobbies, careers, friendships, educations, and access to public space for women (and other people too). I'm not ok with the lowest common denominator pulling that kind of influence, which is why I appreciate Silverstein's post even if there are more important things going on in the world.
  
  If commenters here are right and the reviewer was utterly nasty in her commentary and ignorant of the subject-matter, why not counter-argue instead of bashing all women everywhere (which is what you do when you call a woman a stupid bitch, get back in the kitchen, etc), which has zero to do with the review? That's the problem Silverstein is writing about.
  
  Are commenters here really arguing that the reviewer's personal shortcomings led to (and excused) misogynist comments? That's not how it works. Woman-hating leads to misogynist comments; if you want to explain why it happened, look at the commenters, not the reviewer (i.e. when a commenter calls an asshole a "stupid bitch" instead of an asshole, the commenter has a problem regardless of the asshole in question).
  
  And yes, male reviewers get pulverized in the comments too. That excuses misogynist hate speech how, exactly?
  
  And yes, reviewers probably expect irrational backlash and hateful comments and they should have a thick skin. Just like commenters should know they're going to find opinions when they *seek out reviews,* and should have a thick skin, jeez. Fanboys throw a thousand little tantrums at a review, and this one calm feminist ally is over-sensitive and "victim-y?" I don't think so. For everyone who says writers like Sliverstein are playing the whiny victim, try this on for size: if you excuse hate speech you're a coward.
  
  (Just as a general aside about the over-sensitivity of fans in any geeky genre, I've gotten defensive of my own geeky obsessions, too. But if these fans thought about it, bad reviews do their beloved comic a favor, so long as the bad review has a salient point. Feedback-- including the review's influence on the box office-- shapes the next movies the studios make, thus causing the studios to invest in better movie-making in the comic genre. If everyone just accepted so-so movies without a peep the studios would make crappier and crappier comic movies. Which would suck for fanboys.)

• Andrew Richards | June 18, 2012 12:26 AM

  Kittywrangler; all I have to say to that is welcome to equality. TBH I find it all ironic. For starters, this is a Hollywood feminist blog which fails in terms of the old saying of "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" approach for two reasons.
  
  Firstly, as numerous commentators within the MRM have pointed out, the misandry of Hollywood is rife. Violence against men is the stuff of comedy and the degradation of men through caricatures such as Homer Simpson is equally rife - in ways typically not portrayed with women or where it is portrayed, there is a different symbolism attached to it. To tie this into the superhero genre, the line "you're a dick" in X-Men, is every bit as much a gender based attack as the comments Ms Nicholson faced. That phrase is of course fairly common in society. Now some people might say that women can be called "dicks", but then I should remind someone that the definition of "slut" is "a slovenly woman" yet the term "slut" applies equally to both genders these days too.
  
  Yet why is it that people are outraged over sexism against women where sexism against men gets a free pass? As modern gender writers point to; issues regarding women are explicitly stated and discussed, where issues regarding men are simply quietly assumed and accepted. The reason for this of course is that throughout history, men have been the expendable gender while women have been the protected gender.
  
  Yet the model of patriarchy is utterly flawed, as modern gender writers have pointed out, as it ignores the complexities of hegemonic (and in turn subordinate) masculinities and subordinate (and in turn hegemonic) femininities, misandristically lumping men into one giant all powerful zeitgeist (eg effectively claiming that homeless men are more powerful than aristocratic women) and completely denying women of agency. But then such approaches require an examination of the effects of class on gender and when the Hollywood movie studio machine is a multi-billion dollar a year industry, that's going to be a very large taboo.
  
  Part of equality is also negative - ie where something is good enough for men, then it is also good enough for women. Ergo if vile and emasculating attacks on men are acceptable, then the same is true with women.
  
  Now certainly, as other commenters in this thread have pointed out, ignorance should have a price. However that then raises an interesting dilemma for Hollywood. If it has a problem with misogyny for someone as auxiliary to the industry as movie reviewers and bloggers; then if it is truly about gender equality as opposed to female supremacism, then it must refuse to "simply quietly accept and assume" the misandry it perpetuates in the form of such stereotypes of the "bumbling oaf deadbeat dad" (which can be seen in the fact that the reverse, both in terms of men and that same type of portrayal of women, is more the exception than the rule where it does happen) and using violence against men as comic relief, and actively start to address those. Of course that wont happen anytime soon, surprise, surprise.
  
  As for the feedback itself, you really do need to read the review. She blames the movie for being a sequel, accuses it from stealing plot elements from TF3 when the plot element of the cosmic cube predates Transformers in the Marvel comics, cannot bother getting names right and completely ignores very revealing exposition of Black Widow's character. It was as close to a competent review as throwing random ingredients into a baking dish, not stirring them and then throwing them into an oven on a pyrolytic cleaning setting is to competent cooking. While the misogyny is a sad part of internet anonymity, it's entirely reasonable to wonder how or why she job or still has, her job as a reviewer, as most male reviewers would have been fired for such shoddy work.

• bronzo | May 7, 2012 4:21 PMReply

  Why are you complaining that there like 20 beef cakes and one woman. Don't you all complain when there are a bunch of women jumping around with their tits out?

• james | May 4, 2012 12:43 PMReply

  It's not as if a lack of manners on the internet is anything new.

• Swapsticks | May 2, 2012 3:41 PMReply

  Though I harshely condemn the kind of language most of the attackers have used for this female journo, but I would also like to ask her "How much do you know about the Marvel superhero universe?"
  And if your answer is not 'Everything' then you shouldnt have written that review. I mean I am never going to review any Twilight movie or I can forget getting laid ever again (even my wife is a die hard twilight fan).
  
  Besides, Avengers work because it is more of a story centric film and not a character centric. All the characters you see in the movie were developed in their own previous movies and that is why the Avenger was only PURE ACTION!!!
  
  So next time, please please please DO NOT even try to take up reviewing a 'boycentric' film :)

• Andrew Richards | July 22, 2012 6:14 AM

  Sarah, if you're going to present an argument then at least do yourself a favour and make it an INFORMED opinion. You're so busy pushing an utterly anachronistic patriarchal diatribe that you clearly haven't bothered to read the review. Swapsticks' question is entirely valid given the at best, utterly incompetent and at worst, deliberately inciteful review, where the movie was blamed for being a sequel and where she clearly didn't even know the name of one of the most famous figures in the Marvel Universe, Nick Fury. That's a character that anyone even slightly familiar with the Marvel Universe is familiar with. Furthermore if you're going to push the gender argument, you should really take note of the number of women in the comments who have accused her of ignorance of the Marvel Universe as well.

• Sarah | July 20, 2012 11:12 AM

  Why would you ask a woman this question? Be ause you assume she doesn't know The Marvel superhero universe? Because she's a woman? Because it belings to men? Because women need to be screened before they can engage in discussions?
  
  And what on earth makes you think male bloggers don't review Twilight?

• Halloween Jack | May 3, 2012 1:25 PM

  I would also like to ask her "How much do you know about the Marvel superhero universe?" And if your answer is not 'Everything' then you shouldnt have written that review.
  
  Fanboy, please. The current market for comics is tiny compared to the movie market. If the movie doesn't work on its own merits, it doesn't work. The problem isn't that the movie is "boycentric", the problem is that the same emotionally crippled fanboys who habitually harass women online (see the blog Fat, Ugly or Slutty for more examples) couldn't abide that someone kept this movie from getting 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. Stop being an apologist for the sort of misogynist losers that have given fandom a bad name for decades, please.

• budmin | April 27, 2012 2:40 PMReply

  @Ms. Silverstein I'd just like to take the time to reiterate the personal importance men place on their escapisms. Other then that...WOW!

• David | April 27, 2012 11:03 AMReply

  Avengers fans are man-child aspies who sum up why I hate Marvel's "fun but dumb" moviegoing flock...the moment you go agaist their pack mentality you're condemed. Don't be a sheep, speak your mind and don't be afraid to. Dark Knight Rises is going to annihalate it. I saw the Avengers and while I enjoyed it, I'm going to enjoy Nolan's last hurrah far more. Avengers is overrated.

• BKB: EARTH'S MIGHTIEST HERO | April 27, 2012 9:10 PM

  If I were you, I wouldn't exactly put all my eggs in 1 basket on TDKR "Annihalating" The AVENGERS as easily as you expect it to.. 96% FRESH Rating at RT is saying an awful lot for a movie you think is going to be beaten so easily.. If anything at this point, I'd say it's Nolan's last BATMAN movie that has more to live up to compared to the AVENGERS with a lackluster villain in BANE and a plot that involves politics which is something most superhero fans and general audience would rather avoid.. We want to be EXCITED when we watch our superhero movies, not BORED..

• BKB: EARTH'S MIGHTIEST AVENGER | April 27, 2012 9:04 AMReply

  Sweetheart, do you know WHY she was lambasted by the fans for that amateur ridiculous review she posted, not to mention RT for posting it?? It's because it was a review that was more of a rip on the fans for really liking the movie more than the movie itself.. Who gives a shit if the fanbase is in a frenzy over it right now?? What other options do we have?? What?? TDKR??? You think the average moviegoer who doesn't have Christopher Nolan's penis in their mouth is going to sit through more than 1 viewing of Nolan's last BATMAN over multiple viewings of MARVEL'S finest movie to date being The AVENGERS???? It's called "Feel Good Entertainment" which is why this will beat the dogshit out of BATMAN 3.. And another thing: If your going to review a movie knowing full well the fanbase will be watching you like a hawk in your review, you might want to get the name of the characters right, particularly Samuel L. Jackson's character who's name is NICK FURY, NOT NICK FROST.. Good grief..

• meaghan | May 17, 2012 9:44 AM

  stopped reading at sweatheart

• me | April 26, 2012 10:16 PMReply

  I stopped reading at Middle East piece. Do you have an editor?

• Haden | April 26, 2012 5:54 PMReply

  Sounds like your typical marvel fanboy scum.

• Nig | April 26, 2012 5:59 PM

  DC FAG

• Bad Man | April 26, 2012 5:50 PMReply

  To be fair though she was a dumb bitch called Nick Fury "Nick Frost". Did she even watch the damn film? And looking at her other reviews she hates Marvel films and Likes DC. Green Lantern was an abomination. All the top critics LOVE the movie. She's not a top critic though so i really don't care. (nor will she ever be one with such horrible review skills)
  
  Biased people should NOT be critics.
  
  
  Back to the kitchen lady.

• David | April 27, 2012 11:07 AM

  I love how you claim RT will "deliberatly" make the Avengers look bad...can''t you sheep actually accept some people just don't like the movie? DON'T BE A SHEEP PEOPLE, SAY WHAT YOU TRUELY FEEL, GOOD OR BAD

• BAD MAn | April 26, 2012 5:52 PM

  As a side not Rotten Tomatoes is owned by WB. Who also owns the rights to Batman. So isn't not going to surprise me if they purposely give The Avengers bad reviews to make their own movie look good.

• mm hh | April 26, 2012 5:21 PMReply

  As an older gal, I will admit I can be pretty harsh on my fellow females, but that's because I really hate females who give the rest of us a bad name.
  
  I will not stand by a female just because she is a female. There are enough bad stereotypes of women out there so I really dislike when women add fuel to the fire.
  This gal just had to watch a movie & couldn't even bother to get the name of one of the major characters we've seen in all of the prior Marvel films right? Sorry, but I would take the 2 seconds to look it up so as not to make it seem I didn't watch the movie. It really makes it appear she spent all her time in the ladies' room or at the snack bar.

• CPB | November 9, 2012 10:11 PM

  Tired of the word "females". Sounds like your trying to elevate yourself above a loathsome species...What kind of hateful rhetoric have you intoned, I wonder?

• Andrew Richards | April 27, 2012 10:11 PM

  Farrah, do yourself a favour and look up the term "accountability". As blog entires like this one and responses to it like yours prove; like so many feminists out there, you have no interest in GENUINE equality - otherwise you'd have no problem with a woman taking her lumps in the same way a man would be if he screwed up in the same manner. Instead you clearly expect that when women screw up, they should be treated like perpetual "poor, pathetic, helpless damsels in distress, locked up in a giant impenetrable stone tower, guarded by a giant, scary dragon and waiting helplessly for a white knight to save them" which speaks volumes about the hypocrisy of the stance of feminists.

• Farrah | April 26, 2012 11:39 PM

  She's not the one giving women (yes, women, not "females") a bad name. You are.

• Derek Sorenson | April 26, 2012 4:32 PMReply

  FYI, a male critic has given Avengers a rotten review as well. Guess what is happening? Fanboys are attacking him lol. I really hope he isn't black or else I'll have to see an article with the title "internet hate crimes against reviewer" or what have you.

• Spanky | April 26, 2012 4:19 PMReply

  I'm not sure the response to this review really qualifies as misogyny, since (as you said in the article) there are a number of women launching Vitriol at Ms. Nicholson. It's more an example of how the anonymity of the internet gives us free reign to be dicks to each other. I think a male reviewer would have received a similar response, it has nothing to do with the fact that she's a woman.
  
  That being said, the fact that she happens to be a female reporter has culled some misogynistic comments, because this is the troll default for attacking females on the internet. Disgusting thought it may be, this incident doesn't expose any new incidences of misogyny in our society. It just confirms the misogyny we already knew existed, which is equally disgusting. So I guess now I agree with you? Shit, what happened to my point?

• Cin | May 15, 2012 11:14 PM

  You realize that women can be misogynist as well, right? Whether people agree with the original review or not, hurling gendered slurs at the author prove that misogyny is alive and well. It doesn't have to be "new" it's been around for a long time. It's just sad that there are so many who are willing to overlook it.

• Bes | April 26, 2012 4:12 PMReply

  Wow the passion regarding the reviews of this movie and the reviews of the reviews are amazing. Wouldn't it be nice if Hollywood could make some movies about women characters that women cared so passionately about?! I wonder if it is possible for male story writers, script writers, camera men, casting couch jockeys, directors, editors etc to do? I think it probably is impossible for a crew of men to produce something women audiences care about this passionately. Of course Twilight, Harry Potter and Hunger Games, stories by women writers do have their passionate audience members of both sexes.

• Joss Whedon | April 26, 2012 2:51 PMReply

  You proceeded to make more errors throughout your message. For example, you spelled 'don't', 'do't'. Please correct this. It will make your message seem more sophisticated and respectable.

• Joss Whedon | April 26, 2012 2:46 PMReply

  "too seriously" Sigh. Please edit your writing before submitting it.

• Rohan | April 26, 2012 12:16 PMReply

  I think all the AVENGERS fans should slow down a bit here. I mean it's not like the film is like 'The Dark Knight.' It is what it is... a film full of eye candy action and with heroes for whom you will not feel sorry.

• Step | April 26, 2012 2:07 PM

  I love marvel films, imo they're dependably good movies but don't do anything risky that would make them great. You are absolutely right, they play it safe by throwing in action and eye candy and i could completely understand it getting these reviews. Tbh i don't understand why the film is getting great reviews. It was good for what it was but there was very little depth. Whilst characterization was great the plot was cliched and predictable. I enjoyed the film and would give it an above average review but anyone threatening reviewers in this manner and go on about how its the greatest film on earth need to calm down and go back to watching the fast and the furious.

• Guest | April 26, 2012 11:32 AMReply

  By the way- this column is called WOMEN AND HOLLYWOOD. So no, it's not a surprise that Melissa is writing this as she posts about issues like this all the time- for example lack of female directors in the Oscar race, lack of female directors at Cannes etc. She's not defending every Avengers basher- her agenda is to point out the double standard in Hollywood and she should be commended for it.

• Nams G. | April 26, 2012 4:16 PM

  If the point of the blog is to equalize women in film, you seriously hurt your cause by jumping to the defense of a female film critic who was taking some heat. Critics-- both male and female-- take irrational heat for their reviews quite often. What you've done by penning a defense of those childish comments is put forth the notion that A.) Amy can't defend herself/speak for herself/handle the situation herself, and B) Women in Hollywood critic circles do in fact deserve a double standard, that which places them above the contempt they are BOUND to get by being a film critic.

• Andrew Richards | April 26, 2012 3:21 PM

  And yet she is advocating for a double standard here. You are arguing here that Ms Silverstein is advocating for equality. Part of equality though is accountability, which mean when you cross lines and piss people off, taking your lumps in the same way a man would be expected to. Yes she faced vitriol, but the question the feminists are skirting around here completely is would anyone have cared if it was a man facing the same vitriol, right down to him being emasculated in the same way that Ms Nicholson's gender was targetted amongst other things? The response by feminists actually proves how steeped in traditionalism feminists are- that despite their claims of feeling trapped by gender stereotypes; they will still hide behind the traditionalist notion of "women as poor, helpless, pathetic damsels in distress, locked in the big tall stone tower, guarded by the big scary dragon, waiting for the white knight to rescue them" when it suits them. Until feminism truly discards traditionalist gender stereotypes, even when doing so does not immediately appear to benefit women, then feminism will continue to be based on hyporisy.

• The guy | April 26, 2012 11:04 AMReply

  I do agree with what you said about the threats and sh!t getting out of hand. But I think most of the backlash towards her review was that she gave it a three out of five on rotten tomatoes and apparently flipped a coin (as stated somewhere on twitter) on whether or not to give the film a 'fresh' rating of which I think, regardless of gender, is unprofessional for someone who 'reviews' movies for a living. -.-

• Ben Solis | April 26, 2012 9:44 AMReply

  Hey Derek. I'm a guy. I haven't read this review. I'm not going to comment on it. It may suck, hell for all I know the movie may suck. On the other hand, this review may be brilliant along with a brilliant movie. That's not the point. The point is, you are talking less about the review, and are more so going on the bash about commentors' and the reviewer's supposed "feminist slant." As you have called many people out for "not having read the review," I implore you to find out what feminism really is. Clearly you don't understand and neither do half the women here who were offended by even the use of the term. First off, feminism is not a man-hating, self-absorbed and angry institution; let alone, it is not a rallying cry for women who feel beat down to fight against their oppressor: a man. Feminism is merely a means of expressing a distaste with the culture at large in society, where certain people get paid more for a lesser job than a manager of company. Or when a person gets denied a tough job because of the way they appear. Or when a person in a relationship is forced to work and raise children at the same time while the other does nothing. You can take these examples any way that you want to. However, more often than not the person getting the shaft in these situations is a woman, and that is inherently wrong. Feminism aims to alleviate these inequalities, much like the NAACP and SCLC aimed to give civil, voting, and institutional rights to African Americans. Are you against institutions that reach out for the betterment of all man-kind, much like your hallowed Avengers? I hope not. She has an opinion, a slanted opinion, and while it doesn't agree with yours, it is not wrong. I personally think anyone that obsessed with a comic book or a movie to use against someone as some sort of biblical life altering canon probably has bigger problems than being pissed off at a few women for supporting another woman who may or may have not written a shitty review. I could give a shit less about this movie, I am after all a DC fan, and I am putting all my collective and monetary weight behind TDKR. Do I know the source material for the Avengers, you bet I do -- just because I like DC doesn't mean I don't read other comics. What disgusts me about this is that you are attacking this poor woman because it makes you feel good to be right about something you care deeply about, and that she may know nothing about or care as deeply as you do. Who cares? Who loses? Who looks like a more wreck of a person at the end of the day? I've seen clips and a lot of leaked footage from this movie. If she is taking a feminist perspective on it, I understand her points, because Scarlett Johansen -- aside from looking OK in a body suit -- looks like UTTER CRAP in this movie, as does Cobie Smulders. And how much character development does one expect them to have? The movie isn't about them, or S.H.I.E.L.D. in the first place. There is no room for character development even of the larger characters when FOUR HUGE PERSONALITIES dominate the film. Also, I did read one aspect of her review that I can comment on and agree with: this movie will have no heart, outside of feeling for the team in moments of defeat or triumph. Those are not emotions, they are stereotyped feelings attributed to all warrior archetypes. Frankly, TDKR will be more of a film than this slugfest filled with rampant CGI: which could very well seem like that of a Michael Bay movie to the untrained eye. So in conclusion Derek, you've made yourself look like a jackass, one who has not probably touched or seen a naked woman, on who has never truly loved a woman besides his own mother, and probably still lives in her basement eating knock-off Mac & Cheese while taking time out of your day to slam a woman you have never seen, never known, and probably is laughing hard that you all making such a stir. I'm a reporter in Michigan, and if this happened to me on the comments page, I would be thinking how pathetic you all are, and how awesome my next story is going to be tomorrow. Good day, sir. And good riddance.

• Derek Sorenson | April 26, 2012 4:18 PM

  Much like Amy Nicholson, you do a lot of typing but fail to make a single point. I was explaining to people why she is getting bashed for her review. It has nothing to do with her being a woman, plain and simple. A poorly written review is grounds for a little internet flaming. If a man had done it he would be getting insults as well. Get over it.

• Andrew Richards | April 26, 2012 3:43 PM

  Furthermore, for someone accusing someone else of looking like a jackass, I suggest you remember the old saying about throwing stones while in glass houses.
  
  I quote: "I understand her points, because Scarlett Johansen -- aside from looking OK in a body suit -- looks like UTTER CRAP in this movie, as does Cobie Smulders. And how much character development does one expect them to have? The movie isn't about them, or S.H.I.E.L.D. in the first place."
  
  With Maria Hill, this is to be expected as her character in the comics does not take precedence until she replaces Nick Fury as the Director of SHIELD and clearly we're not there yet. However there were hints of exactly where the storyline will go when we get to a Hill controlled SHIELD with her clear distrust of superheroes.
  
  However it's obvious you haven't even seen the movie if you're making such a baseless and ignorant statement, as Black Widow's past is explored enough to get you asking questions, while brilliantly portraying the character and giving the audience a glimpse at just how tortured and guilt-ridden a soul she is. Oh and FYI you utter baboon, Avengers is a story about SIX superheroes, not FOUR as you claim. Hawkeye and Black Widow are characters which in this move and throughout decades of the Avengers comics and related publications; consistently held their own in a fight. Then again, I suppose clueless radical feminists like yourself would rather completely throw things out by bringing Sersi into the picture way too early, having a character way more powerful than any other; simply because she's a woman.
  
  As for emotional attachment, there is one very poignant moment (I wont say which as it's a MAJOR spoiler) which has nothing to do with the 6 heroes and which shows just how much heart this movie truly has.
  
  So here's a thought jackass; next time, rather than resorting to ad hominem geek tropes because you have no informed opinion here and braying an utterly baseless argument; next time actually try watching the movie in question so you have even half a clue about what you're talking about before posting.

• Andrew Richards | April 26, 2012 3:12 PM

  Ben, I have no doubt that you view feminism that way and let me preface what I am about to say by pointing out that I am a firm believer in equality of opportunity and that my fiancee is a brilliant software engineer and I am completely supportive of her career. However let's be clear, feminism is completely man-hating as it blames everything on men rather than the gender stereotypes which oppress men and women in radically different, equivalently oppressive manners. I have no doubt you and your ilk will bring up patriarchy, but let's look at what Patriarchy ACTUALLY is rather than merely dogmatically quoting from the "Gospels according to Dworkin, Solanas & Daly". Patriarchy is men being reduced to cannon fodder while women stay safe in their homes.
  
  Patriarchy is men dying of disease, injury and exhaustion on large scale infrastructure projects to give women and children better lives.
  
  Patriarchy is chivalry and gallantry men whoring themselves out to women while giving women the power of choice for who they will be with rather than it being about equal choice. It is also expecting men to on one hand be the ultimate alpha, but to capitulate completely to a woman.
  
  Patriarchy is the notion that all men who are victims of domestic violence at the hands of women are either urban myths, not “real men” or perpetual predators finally getting what was coming to them (ie “the woman MUST have been defending herself”).
  
  Patriarchy is the notion that “women and children” must be saved at all costs while men are a dime a dozen and can easily be replaced.
  
  Patriarchy is the notion that men should be reduced to virtual cash registers and ATMs at the cost of the bond and relationship with their children.
  
  Finally, Patriarchy is the notion that homeless men are the epitome of ridicule, failure and contempt in our society and are completely undeserving of compassion or aid. The reality is far more complex than feminism makes out. It is not men oppressing women, but men and women oppressing both men and women into rigid gender stereotypes. Until feminism can get its head around than notion and the fact that all gender stereotypes are based around the notion of "women as needing perpetual protection and "men are perpetually expendable", then none of what you claim of feminism will be accurate. According to current feminist thinking, all those disadvantages are nothing more than privilege. But hey, go ahead and call me a misogynist. It used to be an effective weapon against those of us who are Zeta males, but now we just wear it as a badge off honor and recognise it for what it is- the MRA equivalent of the "man hating lesbian" slur which feminists faced in the 60s.

• Nams G | April 26, 2012 6:10 AMReply

  Another negative review dropped on Rottentomatoes, this time from a guy. People are already dogpiling him and calling him childish names... so you're going to write a story defending him, right Melissa Silverstein?
  
  Also, don't forget to continue your crusade against sexist comments on message boards, I think you're going to make a LOT of progress with that.

• Andrew Richards | April 26, 2012 7:48 AM

  And for the sake of equality, I'll point out that I just compared him to a trained baboon for an equally incompetent review - this time where the reviewer clearly can't understand the concept of characterisation.

• Tyreke | April 26, 2012 4:39 AMReply

  I haven't had a chance to see the film yet, but she did give Casa de mi Padre (45% Tomatometer) a better rating than The Avengers (100% Tomatometer without her review).

• Troy | April 26, 2012 3:46 AMReply

  Despite some mental midgets posting misogynistic slurs and quips, people aren't mad at the reviewer because she's female. People are (short-sightedly) attacking her with her gender - because they're mad about her poor review.
  
  Look at her reviewing track record. It reads as a reversal of nearly every possible consensus out there. She's not the lone brave soul with a strong, personal opinion - she's a troll reviewer. Just as the internet breeds callous, loudmouthed fools, it breeds those who are absolutely tickled pink to wind them up and watch them go.
  
  The thing about RT in particular is that many of the commentator there submit their amateur reviews and hope to one day be paid for doing so. Whenever a reviewer - gender be damned - comes along and sings the praises of "Twilight" while trashing "Pan's Labyrinth" an incredibly hostile reaction is what's to be expected.
  
  What people don't realize is that's exactly what was wanted. Her paltry review site needed hits, she just got hundreds of thousands of them via trolling - problem solved, easy paycheck. Thankfully, her review stands as the single rotten review among nearly 50 now (!) so anyone who's reading reviews to actually consult them will be just fine.
  
  Crisis averted, stand down irrational fanboy brigade. Ms. Nicholson? Enjoy the 5 minutes of fame your website is getting - given the quality of your writing, this will sadly be the high point of your career.

• Derek Sorenson | April 26, 2012 4:53 AM

  This basically sums it up people.

• JK | April 26, 2012 2:01 AMReply

  I might actually agree with you if you weren't obviously biased towards her. Apparently, 'some of her thoughts' are the mildest comments she had stated.

• Laurel Young | April 26, 2012 12:37 AMReply

  Amy is clearly not a comic fan and tried to review film as a serious movie. Thats why she failed
  
  Her review is shallow and imaginative. You idiots who are defending are nothing more than lame douchebag guys who want to show women they're" sensitive " and bitchy man-hating feminists.

• Maria Gonzalez | April 26, 2012 5:27 PM

  amy really pissed me off with her review. I mean, what the hell? didn't she do any research on the comic?! or the characters? I' ve been reading comics for 15 yrs. and her review was pitiful. and the fact that people are defending her is galling. she's obviously one of those useless "look at me! im so kewlies I'm a comic nerd girl!"type of phonies.
  
  her previous reviews are equal lame and worthless. the fact she said one has to see the previous movies... is.. well.. IDIOTIC.
  
  it pisses me off that there are better journalists out there struggling to find work while this useless bimbo is getting paid to string together some gibberish. there are many other female reviewers are better writers AND REAL comic fans who can do better.

• Jamila | April 26, 2012 6:18 AM

  Angry bitter women..........hmmm, i bet you blame men for the bad weather. Listen from one woman to another, her review was idiotic and ridiculous, its clear she's totally incompetent @ reviewing movies as you are for being able to she things from an open perspective. I get it your a feminist...Pro women... wahoo! But for all the good you think your doing, your doing 10 times worse for intellegent women who KNOW what they're doing! The hypocrisy of feminists to agree with another women even if she's wrong and ignorant just makes women look bad!! Avengers is an amazing depiction of a unverse in which i grew up reading and appreciating and the movie franchise will do us FANS justice!!

• Derek Sorenson | April 26, 2012 4:51 AM

  You obviously didn't read her spiteful review, so stop commenting on things you didn't read up on.

• Andrew Richards | April 26, 2012 1:46 AM

  "tried to review film as a serious movie". That's highly debatable Laurel. This movie may have been scifi/action but it was far from light on character and story. In fact Amy even admits this much when, in a move of such mind-blowing stupidity as when someone took "The Two Towers" back to a video store and complained that there was no ending to it; she was critical of the film for requiring the viewer to have watched the 5 movies which it was a sequel to, in order to be able to fully understand what was going on. Does this woman not understand the concept of a sequel (which would be a concept that would be pretty critical to the task of reviewing movies)? The action in this movie is nothing short of intense (I had the pleasure of watching it yesterday), but there are so many layers to characters based on what has transpired in previous movies. Granted The Black Widow slightly draws the short straw on that front as does Hawkeye, but what is going on with those characters is multi-layered enough that there is a wealth of depth there - some of it character driven, some of it due to issues such as interplanetary relations (Asgardian/Human relationships to be exact), arms dealing and the nature of freedom amongst other issues. However Amy was clearly too busy deciding that this was Marvel "and therefore sucks because it's not DC" to be bothered paying attention to that, much less to even getting the characters' names correct. Furthermore she has somehow decided that the movie has directly ripped off the Transformers movie franchise when a quick chat to her boyfriend, if he really is as informed as she claims, would have told her the Avengers has been in print for roughly 50 years, which when applying common sense to the situation, would suggest that while there were plot similarities between in and TF3; there was a high probability of the movie simply drawing on either 1 or multiple plots from the 50 odd years of Avengers comics.
  
  With regular movie reviews this would earn her a "you're wrong because" but this isn't just a regular movie- it's a movie which fans have wanted ever since they first picked up an Avengers comic. In some cases, that means fans in their 60s. That kind of attachment means that for those fans, this isn't just "some movie" but a property near and dear to their hearts, where the characters are like family members to them. Therefore noone can be surprised that when a review can't even give the material enough respect to properly review it; that fans would react as if it had been a member of their own family or a close friend who had been sleighted. If anything, the article and these comments have proven how much geeks are still reviled and discriminated against- where passion is acceptable, only when displayed in ways and towards things which society does not deem "childish". Perhaps those looking towards equality should do themselves a favour and take care of that giant blindspot in their own worldviews.

• DAN | April 26, 2012 12:24 AMReply

  @GUEST If that was the case Transformers 3 would've gotten good reviews all around too.

• Guest | April 25, 2012 11:24 PMReply

  I say bravo to Amy. It's hilarious to see these sensitive uber-geeks getting all riled up. LMAO. Like this even deserves 96% or whatever it will end up with... Critics are just giving it positive reviews based on the shitstick they expected it to be.

• Derek Sorenson | April 26, 2012 4:14 PM

  You are entitled to your opinion, but if I was still in school my lit or comp teacher would have flunked me for making half the mistakes she did. I am not defending the hate she is getting, but merely explaining why she is getting it. It has nothing to do with her being a woman.

• Guest | April 26, 2012 10:39 AM

  First of all, I did read the review, and it's not THAT bad. If you guys are losing your shit over a mixed review I seriously can't wait to see reaction to an actual panning of the movie. Heart attacks? Second of all, she couldn't remember the names of major characters? That's going overboard, as I've seen the main gripe with her review is calling Nick Fury-Nick Frost. That is clearly a Freudian slip that any person could have made- fanboy or not. And the comparisons to Transformers have nothing to do with source material- it's all about style. The trailer for Avengers is completely Bay-ed up and if you didn't know any better you could possibly confuse it as Transformers 4. That's fine, it's going to help sell tickets, but it's true that Whedon is emulating Bay's style- at least via trailers.

• Derek Sorenson | April 26, 2012 4:44 AM

  The fact that you used the word "uber" basically makes you the biggest geek on the internet. Amy did get some unwarranted hate from her review, but she asked for it with the slipshod writing and failure to make a legitimate point. Did you even bother to read it? She couldn't even remember the names of major characters. Amy even went so far as to claim it ripped off of transformers 3. Yeah source material that's half a century old ripped off a movie made in 2011. Makes total sense...makes complete sense...makes zero fucking sense.

• Julie | April 25, 2012 11:04 PMReply

  Any critic is allowed to have their opinion. I think the comments aimed at the female reviewer are sexist.
  
  It's as simple as Lady Reviewer saying, "I did not like The Avengers because...." The appropriate response to that is Fanboy saying, "Well, I happen to disagree, The Avengers is an awesome movie because...."
  
  It's great that people can be so passionate about stuff they care about (such as comic book movies); but it's definitely going below the belt and acting inappropriate and disrespectful when someone spouts sexist remarks at someone simply because they have a different opinion than theirs. Not cool.
  
  To any nerds/geeks who have issues towards women, I'd encourage you to push through your own sexism/misogyny, mainly, because WOMEN ARE AWESOME!!! Women are one of the 7 wonders of the world!!! Women are hot and beautiful and amazing and fantastic!! Women are your friends!! And, if you don't have any lady friends...GET SOME!!! Women are the greatest things ever! EVER!!! I totally encourage humans being kind to other humans. That includes nerds/geeks being kind to women because you know, women are humans. But, that's just my opinion.
  
  I'm a nerd/geek who's been totally stoked and exited about The Avengers movie coming out; it's going to be awesome!! I'm also a nerd/geek who is a huge fan of women (even women who don't like The Avengers movie). What can I say? I'm that awesome. I would encourage other people to be just as awesome as me. What the hell? Why not? Women are you friends. :)

• Derek Sorenson | April 26, 2012 4:49 AM

  Oh look...it's another feminist who didn't even bother to read Amy's garbage review. Instead she decides to swoop in and make comments before understanding the facts. Move along.

• Andrew Richards | April 25, 2012 11:31 PM

  Julie, you really should read the review in question before commenting. It wasn't that it gave it a bad review; it was that it was in and of itself a terrible review - in fact the best word to describe it with is incompetent.
  
  Good reviews review the film in its context (ie whether the film is a sequel or the first in a series of movies) in terms of the information they do or do not include in exposition, bother to get the names of characters right and actually base their opinions on how well constructed the story is. This review criticised the movie for being a sequel of Iron Man 1&2, Captain America, Thor and Edward Norton's Hulk; couldn't even bother getting the names right; criticised people for cheering during the action scenes and because "DC is better than marvel". It wasn't a review, it was a rant! As someone else here said, if this was a man, he'd have been called a "douche", a "dickhead" and have had gender assertions cast on him because he was a man. If you want women to have equality, that means all of equality- including "taking it like a grown women" when you mess up, in the same way that men are expected to "take it like a grown man" when they mess up. Yes the comments got nasty, but it's to be expected considering that there's 50 odd years of fan attachment behind these movies. The funny thing is that I mentioned this to my fiance, who is a brilliant software engineer who is self taught when it comes to many programming languages, and her attitude mirrored mine. See it's entirely possible to think that women can be awesome, have highly successful relations and still think she copped it and had it coming to her just as much as a male reviewer would have if they'd have pulled the exact same stunt.

• ptri | April 25, 2012 10:43 PMReply

  I won't apologize for mysogynistic comments any more than I will for homophobic or racist coments thrown about on the internet. To JOILESS I can only say this: those people have a point. Not the idiot comentors but the people saying "don't get angry". I'm not "part of the problem" for looking at it from a rational perspective and neither are they but I'm not part of some unrealistic solution either. These people feed off of negativity. Get mad and they'll only intensify. Feel free trying to censor the internet, but it simply won't happen. This isn't an epidemic of mysogyny, this is an example of people generally sucking. I haven't read the review, from what I hear it was in fact poorly written. I'll see for myself. But you can't post something on the internet and expect it to only get constructive, rational, thoughtful repsonses. That's simply ignorant. Yes, we should ignore commentors like these because there's no other way to deal with them. if you want to get upset about immaturity, racism and sexism from annonymous sources than prepare to be misserable. Its not about tolerating hatred, its about respecting yourself enough to not let them bait you. There really is no solution, thereby the problem becomes "feeding the trolls" as they say

• K | April 25, 2012 10:33 PMReply

  You are wrong - this is a bad review, a VERY bad review but not in a way you are thinking. It's not negative, it's just poorly written. She gets the names wrong (NICK FROST!), she complains you need to see the previous films to understand this one (a film critic with no concept of a sequel) and complains that the fanboys applauded during the fight scenes. Furthermore, you only need to see her previous reviews to understand her opinions are... skewed. She gives really good films bad reviews and really bad films good reviews. Oh and he liked all DC and hated all Marvel films.
  
  Now, am I ok with her being called names or ordered to go back to the kitchen etc? Absolutely not. Am I ok with giving her bad review and terrible writing skills validity because a percentage of those commenting on her review is being misogynist? Definitely no.
  
  PS I'm a woman myself.

• joiless | April 25, 2012 10:06 PMReply

  It's interesting that so many of the comments below seem to be saying "This is the internet. It's not real life. We should ignore and therefore tolerate immature, sexist, threatening behavior because we must accept what we get from others. There's no point in getting angry about misogyny because hey, they're stupid low-lifes and obviously there's nothing you can do about that." Now take out any mention of the internet from that statement? See anything wrong?
  
  You. Are. Excusing. Misogyny.
  
  Congratulations, "high brow" commenters: You are part of the problem.

• QuoterGal | April 26, 2012 5:43 AM

  Wanted to make it clear that my earlier "Exactly" was agreeing w/ Joiless' "You. Are. Excusing. Misogyny." and not Nam G's later comment.
  
  I think what a lot of folks miss - or skip over - is that you don't have to read the review - although I did - to understand that comments that indicate that only a male would make a proper reviewer, or that the "bitch" only got the reviewing gig because of her boyfriend/boss, or whatever along that vein are: sexist. Simple reading comprehension skills are all that is needed to evaluate the comments along those lines, and reading the review isn't necessary to interpret them - the review is irrelevant, in that sense. If you don't like the review, say so, and why - sounds like if it's that bad, it would be easy - but when your vitriol spills over into demeaning someone personally, on the basis of gender or race or whatever - you lose credibility. And when you defend it because you think the review sucks, you are missing the point of the objections.
  
  And I constantly hear people saying you can't "censor" comments on the internet. Who is saying they want to? I don't. But comments can be responded to on *their* merits, including their faults, just as this review should have been. I think sexism is one of those things - among others - that should be pointed out when seen, and not excused as being some immutable fact of life. Assessment and comment and discussion are part of the way things change.

• Nams G | April 25, 2012 10:32 PM

  Go ahead and rail against internet misogyny in one hand and shit in the other, what you'll end up with is a hand full of shit and a bunch of stupid bastards still saying stupid crap on the internet AND in real life. Whether or not you accept it, whether or not you can ever come to terms with it, it is and will remain a fact of life. It would be nice if we could join hands across the world and just consider each other's feelings, I just haven't seen it happen yet in human history. You can either go on a crusade to erase sexist comments from the internet, or you can ignore sexist comments on the internet. I'll let you decide which seems more practical.

• QuoterGal | April 25, 2012 10:17 PM

  Exactly.

• Nams G | April 25, 2012 10:01 PMReply

  1. Most of the sexist and over-the-top comments are indeed stupid, but are being taken far too seriously. It's anonymous internet bile spewed by fanboys who thought of the nastiest thing they could say purely to get a reaction, which they did.
  
  2. Let's not make what is at its core a poorly written review into a debate on sexism just because a few lazy, simple-minded douchebags chose to hurl lowbrow insults instead of legitimate criticism.
  
  3. If she can't take the heat (including uncalled for personal insults) she should never have stepped foot in the kitchen. I'm sure Owen Glieberman and Peter Travers get mobbed by fanboys from time to time... you know what they do? Take it/Ignore it like a fucking boss, which is what Amy and her Starbucks buddies writing poorly penned blogs in her defense desperately need to learn to do.

• QuoterGal | April 25, 2012 10:01 PMReply

  I think the gender of the reviewer is immaterial, and those of you focusing on it or mentioning it or holding it against her, or citing it as a reason for a review with which you disagree are: well, in a word, lame.
  
  It may be an incompetent review - I'm not getting in to that. Gods know, there are plenty of them around, both from men & women.
  
  Try disagreeing with the merits of her review, and not holding issue with her sex, or attributing what you think is "stupidity" or "bad reviewing" to her being a woman - that would be an Internet Novelty. Who knows, you might even start a trend?

• Steve | April 25, 2012 9:54 PMReply

  This pretty much sums up my thoughts: http://www.theonion.com/articles/local-idiot-to-post-comment-on-internet,2500/

• Daniel | April 25, 2012 9:37 PMReply

  While the misoginystic comments are out of line, THIS IS THE INTERNET. This is the the crusty brown stains on life's underwear. Everyone is a vulture or a potential victem. What did you expect would happen when a highly hyped movie got one lone bad review?? People are only calling her a "bitch" because that can get under her skin. If she was a dude, she'd (he) would be called a "dick" or a "douche." But then wouldn't have made the news because she would have been a man (like the masculinist perspective I'm putting on?). Now, besides the personal insults, the commenters do have a valid point in disliking the review. 1) She says the Avengers is not ambitious enough. Um, I'd say being the center point in 5 separate movies is pretty ambitious. 2) She calls the character Nick Fury "Nick Frost." This is a fact error and is unacceptable in any form of jounalism. My former writing professor would have given her an F on the spot.

• Brad B. | April 25, 2012 9:10 PMReply

  "What happened here is a travesty to the intellectual forum that is supposed to be the internet." - LOL, seriously.?
  
  Yup, the Rottentomatoes.com comments section, that bastion of good will, understanding and intelligent, reasonable discourse. SHAME ON YOU ANONYMOUS INTERNET PEOPLE, YOUR MOTHER AND I EXPECTED MORE!
  
  Lmao. Hilarious!

• Sara | April 25, 2012 8:51 PMReply

  It was clear in the comments that the main problem that people had was with Rotten Tomatoes classifying this 3 star movie review as rotten (unfavorable). Even Melissa interpreted her review as " in no way a really bad review". Warner Bothers owns Rotten Tomatoes, Warner Brothers classifies 3 star reviews as rotten or fresh depending on how it the studio's bottom line. 3 star reviews for a competitor as classified as Rotten, 3 star reviews for a WB production are classified as Fresh. Warner Brothers has a competing superhero movie, The Dark Knight Rising. I think Melissa missed the the real story.

• fleshTH | April 25, 2012 9:04 PM

  Nah, she got the right story. You do make a good point yourself and it should be explored. But i think this should not be over looked. Be it male or female, people have the right to have their opinion, however misguided it might be. That, in turn, is the job of those who comment. I think people have lost the ability to make a sound argument and have fallen into the deep dark abyss of absolute insults. I have a problem with her review even though i haven't seen the movie yet. Base on what I know of the movie i can say that i'm pretty sure I disagree and i'll probably raise that point when i get a chance. But it is important to understand that this article is important. What happened here is a travesty to the intellectual forum that is supposed to be the internet.

• Budmin | April 25, 2012 8:42 PMReply

  Wow...This actually became an issue?
  
  Honestly, there is an underlining subtext of comic guys bemoaning "Wha'do Guuurlz know about comic books any way?" 
  
  Thus it does become rather  impractical to submit  a subpar movie review if you hope to escape the vengeful wrath of 10,000 hostel shut-ins. I'ld sooner post up my credit card Info.

• Brad Barton | April 25, 2012 8:39 PMReply

  I think a lot of the comments are indeed reprehensible, juvenile and out of line... welcome to the world wide web. The internet isn't going to grow up and stop calling her childish names, so maybe you (and she) should grow up enough to completely ignore them.

• Chris R | April 25, 2012 8:24 PMReply

  Women like this should not be allowed to leave the home. They should be staying in and cooking dinner