PushTheButtonMax
Banned
Clearly you've never owned and cared for a dog.
-
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.
- Thread starter MisterHero
- Start date
Clearly you've never owned and cared for a dog.
Yes because people are only basin their choices on baldness and not acting chops.
To find out everything she knew about Superman.
Including his name and parents, and thus where the ship that brought him to Earth is, since they thought the codex was in it.
a lex with hair is equivalent to a blonde superman
But any actor can realistically play a bald lex, just shave his head lol. Michael Rosenbaum isn't naturally bald in Smallville.
I have owned and cared for a dog.
But I'm not going to throw my life away for it. Using Clark's dad as an example, I have a wife, child and family who I support and who deeply care for me. I have an obligation to put their needs before my own, and every decision I make is a reflection of that obligation. I'm sure they'd rather have you around then the dog.
Meus Renaissance
Member
Listening to the interviews and watching the trailers, we knew exactly what kind of story they wanted to tell; a child of two worlds rejected by both. But this theme of identity wasn't explored properly. For instance, Synder and his wife talked about Superman having to confront the suspicions and anxieties of his adopted world. We see a wonderful glimpse of that through the reaction of the mother of Clark's bully; she was both bewildered, frightened and in awe.
But the film literally cut away from that to something else entirely. I made a nod to X-Men because the central theme to that story is the xenophobia and racism that becomes the context for which their identities are based. We see Metropolis but we never get a sense of a world outside that of Clark-The Kents-Zod-Lois-Jor El.
But the film literally cut away from that to something else entirely. I made a nod to X-Men because the central theme to that story is the xenophobia and racism that becomes the context for which their identities are based. We see Metropolis but we never get a sense of a world outside that of Clark-The Kents-Zod-Lois-Jor El.
just watched a detailed review by amc crew and two of them were claiming script was really good, which is kinda funny since many think it was very faulty. One rated it 8.5/10, the other 9/10 and the girl 6/10. It was interesting to watch the debate as it's a summary of the polarization on MOS. The girl didn't like it cause it wasn't 'her' superman; she had a problem with the ending (the controversial end to the fight);thought the script was a bit sloppy and that she wouldn't take young kids to watch it. This is a recurring theme with this movie - rating it low cause you didn't like that it wasn't donneresque. The other two guys thought script was really well written and thought the flashbacks were done really well (lol, since many complained). One called it best movie of the year so far...
reviews like these are just wild... watching it tomorrow, should be fun
reviews like these are just wild... watching it tomorrow, should be fun
Oh, how could I forget.
WINDOWS PHONE WINDOWS PHONE WINDOWS PHONE
WINDOWS PHONE WINDOWS PHONE WINDOWS PHONE
The military spends half the movie treating Supes as an enemy combatant, and it's an (obnoxiously) buoyant moment when they put their rifles down on their own accord.
I don't know what more you wanted. A child running away from big, handsome supes?
I don't know what more you wanted. A child running away from big, handsome supes?
Shhhhhhh. Quiet you liar!!!
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
The Nikon was so fucking blatant lol.
Like I said, I feel that their hearts were definitely in the right place. There was something really unique and cool about the core vision of the movie. They just somehow failed to really take full advantage of it to make the film something really special. The execution totally let down the potential of what was there.
Ken Masters
Banned
F the haters
Enjoyed the movie
Enjoyed the movie
Dice
Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
I agree. It nailed the heart of it, the feeling that you got about Superman and his story, but it didn't flesh it out like it could have, to become as deeply moving as it could have been. It's like you could even see that something was going on inside of him, and that explained
feats like flying up into the machine directly against the beam
For years we've heard people on the inside saying how Goyer/Nolan totally managed to modernize Superman...that they nailed him. What was that all about? Jor-El playing in an Avatar amusement park is interesting? They didn't really do anything interesting. When I originally heard that crap I thought they might do some Birthright-level stuff with Superman actually doing things outside of Metropolis, or caring about wars and massacres around the world. Walking the world or something. Addressing stuff that wouldn't really fly in a believable, "realistic" take on a deity-level character such as this. A world with Superman would be dramatically different, and not just because he's teh alienz. I guess it was just the usual bullshit.
I don't think that's right. More relatable, sure. But less inspirational? They've said on the press tour repeatedly how Superman is a paragon of all that's good and right, and how he inspires in a way other heroes can't. I don't think "less inspirational" was ever the goal, though they definitely achieved it. :lol
Dice
Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
lol we need someone to make a gif with new captions
zod: "send the dubstep machine"
general: "what is that?"
private: "it appears to be a giant subwoofer, sir"
zod: "drop the bass"
scientist: "oh my god... they're distorting our melodies into alien sounds, corrupting the billboard charts"
private: "what does that mean?"
scientist: "they... they're establishing dubstep as a global music trend!"
general: "if they succeed, what will happen to pop music?"
scientist: "pop, as we know it... will no longer exist"
general: "what is that?"
private: "it appears to be a giant subwoofer, sir"
zod: "drop the bass"
scientist: "oh my god... they're distorting our melodies into alien sounds, corrupting the billboard charts"
private: "what does that mean?"
scientist: "they... they're establishing dubstep as a global music trend!"
general: "if they succeed, what will happen to pop music?"
scientist: "pop, as we know it... will no longer exist"
Meus Renaissance
Member
Remember the scene of Clark in the Church talking to the priest about faith and sacrifice? Anyone else spot the art on the church windows behind Clark?
Why do different directors continue to invoke the Jesus imagery so blatantly with Superman? Not complaining but I find it quite interesting.
Yeah all those quotes about goyer/Nolan supposedly "cracking" superman are pretty bullshit in retrospect.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
You can't make him more relatable without dialing down the ideal. The character CAN be a paragon. And at the end of the movie, at the VERY end, maybe he is. But once you decide you're going to make him relatable/identifiable, you decide to de-emphasize the ideal.
The Superman they're talking about on the press tour is the one that came before. Not the one they made for this movie. Totally different interpretation.
maybe in the next movie, their Superman grows into the one they're talking about on the press tour.
Meus Renaissance
Member
The military's targeting of Superman both began and ended in that Kansas fight scene so I'm confused by your "half the movie" suggestion. I would have liked to have seen hints of the general publics perception towards him but we never saw any scenes that were dedicated to an interaction between Superman and the public. At any case, this theme of fear of the alien Kal-El wasn't as big as the cast seemed to have made it, at least in my eyes.
What does that have to do with an individual's decision to save something? A well-intentioned & selfless act shouldn't have to immediately register that way if they see it as necessary.
P.S. Don't own animals.
Because Superman is a Jesus analogy. A "son" sent from the heavens to a human couple to bring up as the savior of the world, instilling in him all the good traditional values of human society. He is stronger, faster, better than all of us, but yet he humbles himself to live among us and protect us.
That's just kinda... Superman's thing.
MrPink93485
Member
Heh, you could make the argument they did crack it. Relentless action, and now the box office receipts are paying off.
That said, I don't think the angle they took was the issue with the film. The execution was the problem.
Meus Renaissance
Member
This is all true - this is something you'd probably mention in a conversation about the character but not necessarily something I'd imagine different directors all choosing to portray so blatantly in their movies.
I Like the movie, I like what they were trying to do with the movie just the execution was off as if from one transition scene to the next something was cut to keep the run time down.
I just get a feeling that they wanted to get all three parts "reimagined" of what everyone knows of Superman but just had to cut stuff down.
At the very least they have rebooted the franchise and that I am glad about
I like that Lois and some others know who Superman is so we don't have to deal with that as a running gag anymore.
I just get a feeling that they wanted to get all three parts "reimagined" of what everyone knows of Superman but just had to cut stuff down.
At the very least they have rebooted the franchise and that I am glad about
Meus Renaissance
Member
I think we can all agree on Henry Cavill completely nailing the role. My favourite Clark yet, and I'm excited to see his portrayal of Clark the reporter once the world sees more of Superman. Will he adopt a different persona? Hmm
bob_arctor
Tough_Smooth
I haven't been keeping up with the latest impressions as me and the family just got back from seeing it. I loved it, I really did. I can see its flaws--the way it especially doesn't linger on certain scenes even as they're about to reach real poignancy and chooses instead to move us in time/place--but it got so much right in thew overall mythos of the character. And speaking of that: I was fine with the supposed controversial scene, and here's why:
I will say this about the action: it is bombastic and there are times it could have been dialed down but the sheer power and brutality on display is just unheard of in previous comic book movies. The gauntlet has been laid down in that regard so hopefully Marvel will step their game up--as it stands, I can't see movie Thor even stepping into the room with this Superman (in the comics, this clearly isn't the case.)
So yeah, really loved it and will go and see it again. The ending was perfect. And I teared up at the last flashback Clark had before that.
Welcome back, Superman. Stick around for a while.
the traumatic effect of killing Zod with his bare hands can be the reason Clark adopts the mantra of never killing again. As an origin story, I feel that is a realistic way to depict how he comes to be the Superman we all know.
I will say this about the action: it is bombastic and there are times it could have been dialed down but the sheer power and brutality on display is just unheard of in previous comic book movies. The gauntlet has been laid down in that regard so hopefully Marvel will step their game up--as it stands, I can't see movie Thor even stepping into the room with this Superman (in the comics, this clearly isn't the case.)
So yeah, really loved it and will go and see it again. The ending was perfect. And I teared up at the last flashback Clark had before that.
Welcome back, Superman. Stick around for a while.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I doubt it. He doesn't need to, really.
I think his Superman, going forward, isn't going to be as public/visible as previous incarnations.
Did not like this much. At all.
Any good will by the strong performances is undermined by one of the most juvenile* scripts I've seen in a film like this. It's like they were ashamed of Superman being 'wholesome', and then proceeded to take pointers from Star Wars Episode III in how to make a film needlessly dreary. So many 'dark' scenes were embarrassing to witness, and just the sort of thing that people scrutinize the worst of comics for.
Dammit, I wanted this to be good
*Admittedly, I've not seen some of the notoriously bad super hero films, like Catwoman or Elektra
Any good will by the strong performances is undermined by one of the most juvenile* scripts I've seen in a film like this. It's like they were ashamed of Superman being 'wholesome', and then proceeded to take pointers from Star Wars Episode III in how to make a film needlessly dreary. So many 'dark' scenes were embarrassing to witness, and just the sort of thing that people scrutinize the worst of comics for.
Dammit, I wanted this to be good
*Admittedly, I've not seen some of the notoriously bad super hero films, like Catwoman or Elektra
TheKaeptain
Banned
He's actually Moses.
WAR recon zero
Banned
Superman is also 33 yo
Spot-on.
I thought it was more like The Matrix sequels.
And, again, spot on.
Meus Renaissance
Member
Where does that plane scene from SR rank now that you've seen MoS?
I liked it a lot, even if I don't think it was a particularly "good" movie. If that makes any sense. There was a lot to like, the scenes were almost all done really wellbut it just doesn't come together as a coherent whole. The childhood/deadliest-catch scenes were repetitiveshould've chosen one orthe other for the origin angle (and I would've definitley gone for Deadliest Catch; easy way to build up the lore of Superman, have Lois track him while he's searching for answers about his past, etc.) but here it just feels like Kevin Costner's Parenting 101 mixed in with a mishmash of snow scenes. Rather jumpy and incoherent.
And then you have the two pivotal character-defining moments and while I like the fact that Clark has to make these decisions and I like the decisions he makes, the execution of those two moments
were just so laughably poor and contrived that I couldn't help but feel a little bit empty. We get all these pivotal plot points; point A, point B, point C but we don't ever see how to get from A to B to C and that's a big reason why the movie just doesn't cohere for me. Nothing is more evident of that than Lois' role in the movie; again, on paper, I like this take, I'm glad she's involved in the movie a lot, but her relationship with Clark is developed entirely off-screen. I'm sorry, but that is just shitty movie makingwhether on Snyder or Goyer's part.
And you could apply that to most of the movie, whether it was Clark's childhood, Clark's search for answers, Clark's relationship with humanity/the army, etc. For a movie that apparently didn't want to be another origin story, it had all the elements of the origin storyit just didn't want to actually go all the way and do it. It's why the part of the movie that feels the most whole is the Krypton scenes because it has a very clear structure, it flows well, one scene clearly leads into the next, etc.
Finally, Snyder apparently didn't get the memo: Matrix Revolutions sucks. Smith vs. Neo was incredibly boring once Neo became invincible because there's nothing at stake when two superbeings beat the shit out of each other. the Smallville action scene was handled so much better and serves as a much better blueprint for how to stick Superman in an action scene without dissolving it of tension.
But I did like it though!
And then you have the two pivotal character-defining moments and while I like the fact that Clark has to make these decisions and I like the decisions he makes, the execution of those two moments
the tornado and the killing of Zod
And you could apply that to most of the movie, whether it was Clark's childhood, Clark's search for answers, Clark's relationship with humanity/the army, etc. For a movie that apparently didn't want to be another origin story, it had all the elements of the origin storyit just didn't want to actually go all the way and do it. It's why the part of the movie that feels the most whole is the Krypton scenes because it has a very clear structure, it flows well, one scene clearly leads into the next, etc.
Finally, Snyder apparently didn't get the memo: Matrix Revolutions sucks. Smith vs. Neo was incredibly boring once Neo became invincible because there's nothing at stake when two superbeings beat the shit out of each other. the Smallville action scene was handled so much better and serves as a much better blueprint for how to stick Superman in an action scene without dissolving it of tension.
But I did like it though!
It still ranks well but if I had MoS on Blu Ray I could probably strum together 5 or so gifs of random action scenes that look better.
Meus Renaissance
Member
sketchsanchez
Member
Ifanboy review podcast
http://ifanboy.com/podcasts/06-15-2013-man-of-steel/
http://ifanboy.com/podcasts/06-15-2013-man-of-steel/
How many lines of dialog did drifter Clark even have up until when he accesses the 18,000 year old space ship? I felt like he barely spoke or had any development. Also, I think it really hurt the movie to decide to inter-splice Clark's childhood scenes between present day Clark. It made the movie feel disjointed. Had the movie been presented in a linear story, I think it would have given a lot more weight to the character. I felt like the scene with Pa Kent's death came far too late in the movie as well.
WAR recon zero
Banned
Watched it again, loved it again
That was at least a real Superman moment.
Meus Renaissance
Member
The pacing (or cutting) of the film has been the most consistent source of criticism from both fans and critics alike. It's curious that it got passed so many people at WB, including Synder and Nolan, but they have must have been happy with it. I wonder what those two in particular are thinking right now as they read these reviews that touch on this
Almost none, I think.
I can't remember if he goes to the bar before or after he goes to the ship but he definitely has, at most, one line of dialogue on the boat, maybe a line or two of throwaway expository dialogue on the rig "get to da choppa," etc., doesn't speak when he's carrying Lois' bags (that was Clark, right?), and really only says that cauterizing the wound will be fucking painful.
childhood
I'm pretty much convinced Nolan had nothing to do with this movie. Which is fine—Nolan is a good filmmaker but if you're going to hand over the reins to Snyder, you need to trust him with that autonomy. I think they were just too concerned of it being a retread of the Donner movies, in the way that ASM was a retread of Spiderman 1... and they were more afraid of that than pacing issues.
Meus Renaissance
Member
Poor Bryan
I can't imagine how it feels seeing this film beat his in the BO whilst simultaneously ruining his Donner romanticism. I still remember his Comic Con Q&A getting into a passionate defence of the (smaller) House of El crest design. One thing that immediately shone through was how passionate he was about the character; a genuine fanboy.