Inspired by the linked XKCD. Using 60% instead of 50% because that’s an easy filter to apply on rottentomatoes.
I’ll go first: I think “Sherlock Holmes: A game of Shadows” was awesome, from the plot to the characters ,and especially how they used screen-play to highlight how Sherlocks head works in these absurd ways.
Lmao at the last one. It’s one of my favorite movies, I knew the ratings were bad but didn’t realise it’s under 60% on RT.
Either ways, I’d watch the sequel if it follows the same flavor
I’d say that the spiritual sequel was Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey.
The Birds of Prey (usually founded by Oracle, including the Question, Huntress, Cassie Cain (one of the Batgirls), etc. etc. is… well… they’re not done quite right. They changed a lot for the movie and made Harley Quinn the center-stage.
Harley Quinn gets her breakup story with the Joker. She meets up with a whole bunch of street-level superheroes, they all go off and do a grand adventure (less grimdark than Amanda Waller’s stuff, but the Birds of Prey were always more “hopeful” than the Suicide Squad).
The important bit is that these characters: the Birds of Prey, they’re all superheroines. I don’t necessarily agree with the new interpretations of these characters, but everyone “deserves” to be treated as a superheroine, albeit street-level (aka: few / no powers, focus on just thugs and gangs and smaller-scale stuff). I think everyone had their chance to shine and show that they deserved to be part of a superheroine team.
Should Oracle have been there? Obviously, she’s one of the most important Birds of Prey IMO. Was Huntress rewritten to become a joke of a character? Yes, but I did genuinely laugh out loud at some of her lines, so maybe it wasn’t all bad. Etc. etc. Its a very flawed movie but I did ultimately enjoy it as a whole.