• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Man of Steel |OT| It's about action.

legacyzero

legacyzero

Banned
Maninthemirror said:
Link?
Click to expand...

image.php


EDIT: FUCK.
 
R

raiyzo

Neo Member
What happened in the ending was totally 'Supermanistic'. Even Chris Reeve's superman would've
snapped Zod's neck or killed him in another fashion. What was superman going to do? continue fighting endlessly at the expense of more human lives? try and get zod away from populated areas? only to delay the inevitable - MORE HUMAN DEATHS. The Zod in MOS was not going to stop until he killed the planet so he had to go, period. Even Chris Reeve's superman would've done this but the script never put him in this predicament, that's all.
.
 
D

Divvy

Canadians burned my passport
I really liked 300 as well.

I thought it was better than the book too

*Runs away from Miller fans*
 
T

Toa TAK

Banned
icarus-daedelus said:
You didn't intend it this way, I'm quite sure, but being atypical for the incredibly played-out superhero genre is absolutely a good thing.



I like comic books and consider myself more than passingly familiar with them but rarely care for comic book movies; this is really the first time a film has sold me on the idea that superhero powers are not only flashy and cool but actually mean something and are not merely divorced from reality in some kind of idealized power fantasy scenario. That's maybe why I appreciated the destruction aspect of the movie: showing us exactly what Kryptonians, as a group, are capable of helps put things in perspective by showing us both what Superman, as an individual, can and, more importantly, can't do. He can't save everyone and everything, or even most of the humans killed in the film, but he does have an awe-inspiring level of power utterly outstripping that of humanity's greatest tool of brute force (the American military, made amusingly ineffective herein but not without moments of extreme bravery from its individual constituents, pretty much like life) that in turn requires a level of responsibility and control which he slowly learns and earns over the course of the life we're shown. The powers are what make him super, but what he does with them is heroic: the story Lois traces of him is of a man who literally can't help but help others, utilizing his power to protect the weak and regularly sacrificing his own chance at a normal life to do so.

Superman has always been my favorite superhero, but for reasons that are rarely tapped for their potential, i.e., he has had his powers since birth - they are inseparable from his self, foisted upon him by parents of another world and fostered by his adoptive parents on Earth, under the influence of the latter never content to live a passively selfish life of his own. It's really rich material if anyone ever mines it - something I feel MoS accomplishes in a way no other cinematic adaptation of this character, or maybe any other in the comic canon, has managed. It's also probably why I didn't really mind the Jesus metaphors at all, since it's essentially a take on the Jesus of JC Superstar, to a logical extreme. lulz.

I'd say Man of Steel is the better movie-movie, here, which is more important: I think it has a much more coherent and interesting through-line for the lead character and the intersection of his developing identity with the plot machinations, the villain's goals, and the themes of the film is better realized here. Batman Begins and Watchmen (substituting 'ensemble' for 'lead' in this equation) are the only two other [super]hero movies that I think really succeed on that level aside from maybe an animated Bats film or two, though I'll note that there are a few mostly-older comic book films that make for terrific adventure-comedies too.

Oh, and you know what? I actually love the casually intensive science fiction of the imaginatively designed Krypton-set opening and the way it feels almost like a grand serial-adventure to set up the very large, mythical backing of Clark Kent's very small, personal story. The whole movie has a brilliant way of feeling like a realistic personal journey grounded within an archetypal mythological tale without sacrificing either tack.
And you know what, punching people through the air is pretty fucking cool too!

I realize this opinion will be in the vast minority here, there, and everywhere, however. Well, that was a rant off my chest!
Click to expand...

Welcome to the Planet icarus-daedelus.
 
G

G-Fex

Member
So I finally saw it today

I lied before, feel free to ban me if you want Duckroll I don't care.

I loved it.

I absolutely loved it. I'm aware a lot of people don't like it and I can see why. This isn't necessarily the superman that stays by the status quo made back by the Reeves movies or even the Routh movie.

I loved it however, man Cavill is so great. There's a good amount of humor, not terrible humor like say the Nolan Batman films but whatever.

I seriously really loved it, it's wonderful. I have no need to compare it to the marvel movies and I'm judging it on it's own merits. I love it.

Maybe it went too far with
destruction of things
But I did love every fight and confrontation and I know everybody and their momma has said it but man Faora was gorgeous.

Exciting, great and man I'm satisfied.

Superman is quite possibly the greatest superhero ever.
 
T

Toa TAK

Banned
G-Fex said:
Exciting, great and man I'm satisfied.

Superman is quite possibly the greatest superhero ever.
Click to expand...

Really glad you liked it. This movie kinda made me realize why people love Superman, and why he's been able to last so long. He really is the greatest superhero ever.

icarus-daedelus said:
THANKS I'M GLAD TO BE HERE
Click to expand...
Cue longing eyes.

Awkward smile.

Cut to black.
icarus-daedelus said:
I'm totes there with you, mang. I love it. LOVE it. Looooove eeeeiiiit.

Boy did I never really realize how much I really wanted deep down to see Superman fly around (and punch someone repeatedly through the air holy shit) in such a difficult but physical and satisfying way.
Click to expand...
YES. This movie finally got Superman's fighting done right. It's as good as the animated series.
 
G

G-Fex

Member
That's essentially what I want from this new movie series.

I want the cartoon series.

I want Toyman, Parasite, metallo, Bizzarro, mixypliztik all these things.
 
W

witness

Member
G-Fex said:
So I finally saw it today

I lied before, feel free to ban me if you want Duckroll I don't care.

I loved it.

I absolutely loved it. I'm aware a lot of people don't like it and I can see why. This isn't necessarily the superman that stays by the status quo made back by the Reeves movies or even the Routh movie.

I loved it however, man Cavill is so great. There's a good amount of humor, not terrible humor like say the Nolan Batman films but whatever.

I seriously really loved it, it's wonderful. I have no need to compare it to the marvel movies and I'm judging it on it's own merits. I love it.

Maybe it went too far with
destruction of things
But I did love every fight and confrontation and I know everybody and their momma has said it but man Faora was gorgeous.

Exciting, great and man I'm satisfied.

Superman is quite possibly the greatest superhero ever.
Click to expand...

Very glad you loved it. I'm right there with you, about 30 minutes in is when I realized it.
 
S

Solo

Member
G-Fex said:
So I finally saw it today

I lied before, feel free to ban me if you want Duckroll I don't care.

I loved it.

I absolutely loved it. I'm aware a lot of people don't like it and I can see why. This isn't necessarily the superman that stays by the status quo made back by the Reeves movies or even the Routh movie.

I loved it however, man Cavill is so great. There's a good amount of humor, not terrible humor like say the Nolan Batman films but whatever.

I seriously really loved it, it's wonderful. I have no need to compare it to the marvel movies and I'm judging it on it's own merits. I love it.

Maybe it went too far with
destruction of things
But I did love every fight and confrontation and I know everybody and their momma has said it but man Faora was gorgeous.

Exciting, great and man I'm satisfied.

Superman is quite possibly the greatest superhero ever.
Click to expand...


You never learned to mind your surroundings, G-Fex.
 
S

SSGMUN10000

Connoisseur Of Tedium
Never gave my impressions on the movie. Saw it last Saturday. Action scene's were awesome. Story was so-so. Give it an 8 out of 10. Much better than Returns.
 
T

Toa TAK

Banned
Shaanyboi said:
That director's cut was interesting to watch once, as already a fan of the movie. But I could NEVER watch it again. As with most extended editions, there's usually a reason that stuff is taken out.
Click to expand...

True, but as a huge fan of the original graphic novel, it was still amazing that this even exists.
 
A

AgentOtaku

Member
Toa TAK said:
Ha, funny you say that. My friend and I watch it together pretty often.



How old is your son?
Click to expand...

9

I actually read Grant Morrisons All Star Supes to him when he was like 7 or so. Yeah we're big superman fans.

By yeah, it's an.... Interesting interpretation of the character. The problem is the film is a fucking mess.

Overlong
Editing/structure that's all over the damn place
Zach Snyder thought he was Terrence Mallick
Emotional beats that are completely unearned
Lois Lane/Amy Adams equivalent of acting is making the same face in every scene very intensely
Music score that just tries too hard
 
A

AgentOtaku

Member
ViewtifulJC said:
I'll say this: if you like seeing Superman and shit blowing up, this one's got it. Shit blows up real good. It's a spectacle, I'll give it that.

But it's all style, no substance. A cold, thoroughly mediocre blockbuster with a half-ass love story, one dimensional villains, flat characterization, generic destruction of non-descript buildings, and a metallic dour tone that sucked any amount of fun the movie attempts to do. It's not an enjoyable film to sit through, which makes it an failure as a Superman film and a summer blockbuster.
Click to expand...

Catching up with this thread and this pretty much nails it
 
D

Discotheque

Banned
this film has made way for a sequel that can learn from it's mistakes. i liked it but i think there's massive potential for the next one if they don't also make it so grim and joyless.

i smiled a lot during man of steel. but only because i thought it was cool (and also i liked the flashbacks a lot too). I'd like to see some humor and a more believable romance there too though.

i hate the condescending posts earlier that assumed those calling it joyless wanted clark kent to be tony stark and also save cats from trees and shit.
 
D

Dead

well not really...yet
I don't really consider the movie joyless at all, From a story perspective humour just didn't have a place in a lot of the film. Levity and humour need to make sense in context. And The instances of the film that did elicit a kind of joyous feeling, like Clarke flying for the first time that is one of the finest examples of an emotional moment I've seen in any superhero film.

I'm just glad the movie steered clear of the Nolan brand of humour ie is that a bazooka?!?! Moments like that where humour simply seems to be there in order to meet a quota simply take you out of the film and cheapen it.

icarus-daedelus said:
I like comic books and consider myself more than passingly familiar with them but rarely care for comic book movies; this is really the first time a film has sold me on the idea that superhero powers are not only flashy and cool but actually mean something and are not merely divorced from reality in some kind of idealized power fantasy scenario. That's maybe why I appreciated the destruction aspect of the movie: showing us exactly what Kryptonians, as a group, are capable of helps put things in perspective by showing us both what Superman, as an individual, can and, more importantly, can't do. He can't save everyone and everything, or even most of the humans killed in the film, but he does have an awe-inspiring level of power utterly outstripping that of humanity's greatest tool of brute force (the American military, made amusingly ineffective herein but not without moments of extreme bravery from its individual constituents, pretty much like life) that in turn requires a level of responsibility and control which he slowly learns and earns over the course of the life we're shown. The powers are what make him super, but what he does with them is heroic: the story Lois traces of him is of a man who literally can't help but help others, utilizing his power to protect the weak and regularly sacrificing his own chance at a normal life to do so.

Superman has always been my favorite superhero, but for reasons that are rarely tapped for their potential, i.e., he has had his powers since birth - they are inseparable from his self, foisted upon him by parents of another world and fostered by his adoptive parents on Earth, under the influence of the latter never content to live a passively selfish life of his own. It's really rich material if anyone ever mines it - something I feel MoS accomplishes in a way no other cinematic adaptation of this character, or maybe any other in the comic canon, has managed. It's also probably why I didn't really mind the Jesus metaphors at all, since it's essentially a take on the Jesus of JC Superstar, to a logical extreme. lulz.

I'd say Man of Steel is the better movie-movie, here, which is more important: I think it has a much more coherent and interesting through-line for the lead character and the intersection of his developing identity with the plot machinations, the villain's goals, and the themes of the film is better realized here. Batman Begins and Watchmen (substituting 'ensemble' for 'lead' in this equation) are the only two other [super]hero movies that I think really succeed on that level aside from maybe an animated Bats film or two, though I'll note that there are a few mostly-older comic book films that make for terrific adventure-comedies too.

Oh, and you know what? I actually love the casually intensive science fiction of the imaginatively designed Krypton-set opening and the way it feels almost like a grand serial-adventure to set up the very large, mythical backing of Clark Kent's very small, personal story. The whole movie has a brilliant way of feeling like a realistic personal journey grounded within an archetypal mythological tale without sacrificing either tack.
And you know what, punching people through the air is pretty fucking cool too!

I realize this opinion will be in the vast minority here, there, and everywhere, however. Well, that was a rant off my chest!
Click to expand...
Shit, that pretty much sums up most of my opinion more eloquently than I ever could have
 
D

Discotheque

Banned
yeah i should have mentioned that there really wasn't much room for it in THIS film. but i think the sequel should have some humor. definitely not the forced cops shit in batman though haha.

and yeah icarus makes a great argument for this film.
 
S

Sir Alemeth

Member
Been taking to friends and co-workers about this film. One thing I realized is that everyone refers to this movie as "Superman", not "Man of Steel". Like "oh have you seen Superman?" or "the new Superman movie came out!"
 
K

KalBalboa

Banned
Do you think Man of Steel stands a chance of having a healthy second weekend against Monsters & World War Z?

Right now Man of Steel is sitting at $161 million domestic. Weekend number 2 will be telling for the legs this film has in the US, and competition is stiff. WWZ originally looked like a sure-fire bomb, but it's getting solid reviews.

I'm still betting it clears $300 million domestic, but I don't think it'll pass $350. I'd love to be surprised, though.
 
W

WillyFive

Member
Sir Alemeth said:
Been taking to friends and co-workers about this film. One thing I realized is that everyone refers to this movie as "Superman", not "Man of Steel". Like "oh have you seen Superman?" or "the new Superman movie came out!"
Click to expand...

Of course. Man of Steel is ridiculous to say out loud.

This makes me wonder, at what point in the movie was the name justified? They could have done the "Superman is unbreakable, both physically and emotionally", but his character is completely flat throughout the whole film, no development whatsoever. At least TDK gave reasons for its name in the actual plot.
 
K

KalBalboa

Banned
WillyFive said:
They could have done the "Superman is unbreakable, both physically and emotionally", but his character is completely flat throughout the whole film, no development whatsoever..
Click to expand...

I wouldn't go that far. He's torn between trusting humans Kryptonians and is clearly elated a bit when he discovers his origins, name, etc... but by the end he literally shouts
"Krypton had its chance"
and sides against Krypton.

He grows and learns what it'll mean to go public, not to mention the responsibilities it will entail. He even decides to
land a permanent job for a change
and start building relationships outside of his mother & father.
 
A

Ahasverus

Member
KalBalboa said:
Do you think Man of Steel stands a chance of having a healthy second weekend against Monsters & World War Z?

Right now Man of Steel is sitting at $161 million domestic. Weekend number 2 will be telling for the legs this film has in the US, and competition is stiff. WWZ originally looked like a sure-fire bomb, but it's getting solid reviews.

I'm still betting it clears $300 million domestic, but I don't think it'll pass $350. I'd love to be surprised, though.
Click to expand...

Monsters U is a beast. My theather was completely filled today, it was boring and mediocre but god it has some brand value. WWZ is not a threat.
 
W

WillyFive

Member
KalBalboa said:
I wouldn't go that far. He's torn between trusting humans Kryptonians and is clearly elated a bit when he discovers his origins, name, etc... but by the end he literally shouts
"Krypton had its chance"
and sides against Krypton.

He grows and learns what it'll mean to go public, not to mention the responsibilities it will entail.
Click to expand...

I don't think any part of this was emphasized by the movie. Sure, that line was there, but that was more as a response to the line that came before it rather than some significant character moment (which the movie really lacked overall).

As for the job part, he also explained that as a logistics reason rather than some conclusion to an arc (unless you consider the fact that it has to happen in order to be Superman an arc)
 
P

PhoncipleBone

Banned
Discotheque said:
this film has made way for a sequel that can learn from it's mistakes. i liked it but i think there's massive potential for the next one if they don't also make it so grim and joyless.

i smiled a lot during man of steel. but only because i thought it was cool (and also i liked the flashbacks a lot too). I'd like to see some humor and a more believable romance there too though.

i hate the condescending posts earlier that assumed those calling it joyless wanted clark kent to be tony stark and also save cats from trees and shit.
Click to expand...

Here, here!

And as for the collateral damage issues I and others are having:
Yes, there are many instances in the comics and the beloved animated shows that have Supes laying waste to so much real estate and we do not blink an eye. I think the issue I am having with it in Man of Steel is just the realism of it.
In a cartoon and a comic book, there is a slight disconnect from reality because of the medium. You recognize that there is a lot of stuff being destroyed and probably countless people dying because of it. But when shown in a film and with so many shots showing countless civilians running from the destruction, it puts a human face to the destruction and makes me aware and identify more with the people. And it makes me think of just how many lives are being lost while the spectacle is going on. That is probably why the destruction bothers me so much in Man of Steel. It feels real, where in the comics and cartoons it is just cool looking and nice to see our heroes cut loose. But when I see Superman helping to lay waste to so much stuff and not really have any care for the human cost of it, it bothers me.
I know it does not bother others on here, but that is just where we see different things in the film.
 
D

Deleted member 1235

Unconfirmed Member
saw it last night. enjoyed it a lot.

Superman always suffers from 'nothing hurts this guy' pretty badly though. The superman character itself is a bit ridiculous, which I guess it's why they always have to resort to kryptonite. But it was handled OK in this film. Action was great but wasn't a great sense of consequence in the fights, watching 2 invulnerable immortals duke it out for a while was great action but it gets boring after a while when nobody can get hurt at all.
 
E

Error

Jealous of the Glory that is Johnny Depp
icarus-daedelus said:
You didn't intend it this way, I'm quite sure, but being atypical for the incredibly played-out superhero genre is absolutely a good thing.



I like comic books and consider myself more than passingly familiar with them but rarely care for comic book movies; this is really the first time a film has sold me on the idea that superhero powers are not only flashy and cool but actually mean something and are not merely divorced from reality in some kind of idealized power fantasy scenario. That's maybe why I appreciated the destruction aspect of the movie: showing us exactly what Kryptonians, as a group, are capable of helps put things in perspective by showing us both what Superman, as an individual, can and, more importantly, can't do. He can't save everyone and everything, or even most of the humans killed in the film, but he does have an awe-inspiring level of power utterly outstripping that of humanity's greatest tool of brute force (the American military, made amusingly ineffective herein but not without moments of extreme bravery from its individual constituents, pretty much like life) that in turn requires a level of responsibility and control which he slowly learns and earns over the course of the life we're shown. The powers are what make him super, but what he does with them is heroic: the story Lois traces of him is of a man who literally can't help but help others, utilizing his power to protect the weak and regularly sacrificing his own chance at a normal life to do so.

Superman has always been my favorite superhero, but for reasons that are rarely tapped for their potential, i.e., he has had his powers since birth - they are inseparable from his self, foisted upon him by parents of another world and fostered by his adoptive parents on Earth, under the influence of the latter never content to live a passively selfish life of his own. It's really rich material if anyone ever mines it - something I feel MoS accomplishes in a way no other cinematic adaptation of this character, or maybe any other in the comic canon, has managed. It's also probably why I didn't really mind the Jesus metaphors at all, since it's essentially a take on the Jesus of JC Superstar, to a logical extreme. lulz.

I'd say Man of Steel is the better movie-movie, here, which is more important: I think it has a much more coherent and interesting through-line for the lead character and the intersection of his developing identity with the plot machinations, the villain's goals, and the themes of the film is better realized here. Batman Begins and Watchmen (substituting 'ensemble' for 'lead' in this equation) are the only two other [super]hero movies that I think really succeed on that level aside from maybe an animated Bats film or two, though I'll note that there are a few mostly-older comic book films that make for terrific adventure-comedies too.

Oh, and you know what? I actually love the casually intensive science fiction of the imaginatively designed Krypton-set opening and the way it feels almost like a grand serial-adventure to set up the very large, mythical backing of Clark Kent's very small, personal story. The whole movie has a brilliant way of feeling like a realistic personal journey grounded within an archetypal mythological tale without sacrificing either tack.
And you know what, punching people through the air is pretty fucking cool too!

I realize this opinion will be in the vast minority here, there, and everywhere, however. Well, that was a rant off my chest!
Click to expand...

index.php
 
R

ReiGun

Member
catfish said:
saw it last night. enjoyed it a lot.

Superman always suffers from 'nothing hurts this guy' pretty badly though. The superman character itself is a bit ridiculous, which I guess it's why they always have to resort to kryptonite. But it was handled OK in this film. Action was great but wasn't a great sense of consequence in the fights, watching 2 invulnerable immortals duke it out for a while was great action but it gets boring after a while when nobody can get hurt at all.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say they were invulnerable. There were moments where Superman was clearly staggered and winded.

I do agree that the movie could have done a better job showing how their attacks hurt each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Variety: When Superman and Batman Copyrights Expire in a Decade, Will It Be Kryptonite for DC?
20
2K
Skyfox replied
Transformers One: SHOCKINGLY good!
23
1K
Codes 208 replied
Borderlands Movie | Rotten Watch
Community Cringe 2 3
122
7K
StreetsofBeige replied
Final Fantasy XV was something else
2 3
132
5K
consoul replied
Doctor Strange Game?
37
2K
Papa_Wisdom replied
Top Bottom