It's yet another slap stick insincere Gunn flick. Hard to take anything that happens in this movie seriously. It's all meant to be as light tone as possible, which makes the odd emotional scenes fall like complete melodrama. That final conversation between Lex and Supes was like two kids at the play ground having a disagreement. The scene where Lois scolds Clark made him look like a complete naive idiot. And let's face it, nobody thinks Superman of all people would cry over some tweets. That's just Gunn self-inserting his own weak traits to the character. This guy never felt like Superman, just a random guy with emotional outbursts and a dog he can't control, who happens to fly. I will never understand how anyone can say a movie this bipolar in structure (shift from slap stick to melodrama) is inspiring or hopeful. It's cynical and meaningless.
That's how Gunn is gonna do it going forward. I don't think we will see many traditional origin story films from him, it will all be this in media res type framing.
For the main characters I feel like I don't need to see origin stories for the next ten years.
Soooooo, does the penis pump thing actually work?Bought the digital version from Amazon yesterday and saw that it only had one negative review so far. I was curious what kind of person would spend $30 on the digital version of a movie they supposedly hate on day one of availability and uh... I can't say I'm surprised.
Speaking of media, it reminds me of another thing I didn't like about the movie, and Superman isn't alone in this. I have no found a single movie or TV show that incorporates social media into it in a good way. The whole "social media is turning on Superman!" thing was really stupid. A) It absolutely would not work that way. It would be split like everything else, the guy is a fucking super hero, he'd be beloved by millions and one little sound clip leaked by Luthor would not have changed social media sentiment that easily or quickly. B) Who gives a fuck about social media. It's still a small sliver of the planet.
Not really for any of them. They can all be summed up in 2-3 sentences.
Bought the digital version from Amazon yesterday and saw that it only had one negative review so far. I was curious what kind of person would spend $30 on the digital version of a movie they supposedly hate on day one of availability and uh... I can't say I'm surprised.
variety.com
there's a bit of, very stupid, dialogue where they establish it as an in-universe known weakness when they ask "don't we have more of that kryptonite stuff, what's it called?" -"kryptonite...".
Yes, earlier in the film they specified that Kryptonite is a known quantity, and that all of the Kryptonite on Earth has seemingly been destroyed. One would presume this happens sometime after Bloodsport had shot Superman with a Kryptonite bullet.
To be fair there was an entire Superpets CG film with Krypto (and it was really good) so the dog is actually one of the most current DC heros.
Kind of interesting how they immediately went to such high level stuff like pocket universe creation, superhero cloning etc. I thought one of the main advantages of a reset would be the opportunity to dial it back a bit. The introduction of those two concepts into the universe already lays the groundwork for any future death to be undone via 'we had a backup stored in a pocket universe'.
It really is. Gunn's Superman is like walking into a comic book store, picking up a random issue of Superman as your starting point, and being thrown into an ongoing story with an established world filled with characters you may have never heard of. It essentially mimics most comic book reader's first foray into comics, as there's rarely an origin story in your first comic.
I don't think the plan is for there to be any deaths, and if there are any, they'll eventually be undone by design. You know, like a comic book.
Right on. Who needs stakes anyway?
I know this is going to sound crazy, but I know John McClane isn't going to die in a Die Hard, nor is his wife or his buddy, but I still care about the character regardless. I think stakes are somewhat over-rated regarding something that matters.
Not everything needs to be explained. Lex is rich with a lot of resources so he can definitely find metahumans and kidnap them. Maybe he and Metamorpho knew each other somehow or he just wanted him for his powers. How he got him isn't important. Clark has been Superman for 3 years so a lot of things have happened. Its not like he and Lex meet for the first time in this.
I think this comment somewhat touches on the problem. The 'normal' audience is not enjoying it as they once were and is deciding not to stay. The 'comic book' audience is more accepting of these elements and is not too worried about traditional tenets of storytelling like coherency or consequences, but they are not numerous enough to sustain these budgets without the normal audience.
Inflation is not taken into account normally when these things get talked about. This movie seems to be the rare case when it gets brought up all the time for some reason. You probably don't think Avatar: The Way of Water and Avengers: Endgame are in top 3 highest grossing movies of all time.
Its doing very well domestically so why not?
The benefit of taking it into account is it is more accurate. What is the benefit of not taking it into account?
I would take inflation into account or what is the point of the list? A list in nominal terms is just going to reflect how the unit of measurement ($) has decreased in value over time.
I don't know what you're talking about. The issue isn't "normal audiences", the issue is clearly a divide between domestic audiences and foreign ones, unless your assertion is that American movie goers don't count as "normal".
You're not entering any movie (unless you've been spoiled) with prior knowledge of the story. But you're also entering a superhero movie with the broader knowledge that, almost assuredly, the main characters will not die. Like, people watching "Man of Steel" didn't assume Clark and/or Lois were going to die. That didn't stop them from being invested in them. The same is absolutely true for this film. Tension is achievable through what is on the screen, because you become immersed in the action and the story, even if deep down, you know the main characters aren't going to die.
But they do kill Superman in BvS. And bring him back in JL in a way that created a lot of narrative tension and audience emotion. And it was significant to the plot because it was the death of Kal-El that enabled the bad guys to risk going back to Earth again.
Batman v Superman literally ends with rocks floating over his tombstone, outright telegraphing that he was either still alive, or would be back somehow. I also think, if we're going to discuss logical consistency in storytelling, the death of Superman would have no impact on whether or not Darkseid's forces invaded Earth, and that's more or less stated outright in both versions of Justice League. They weren't staying away out of fear of Superman, they had lost the knowledge of where Earth (and the Anti-Life Equation) was, and Lex had inadvertently given them that information when he made contact with them.
I don't think it's silver era, I think it's Gunn. He is a kind of person very skilled at being fun for an hour at a party and he puts that sort of energy into all of his work. Guardians 3 is probably the greatest depth he can reach.
Talking about superhero movies in general, and yes it is.
I said that because it was not clear whether you meant you know who will die in Die Hard on first viewing, or that knowing what happens on repeat viewings doesn't ruin it (which I would agree with). On first viewing I wouldn't consider it a given that Hero, Buddy and Wife will all definitely survive.
It is obviously not about an assumption they will die, but I think if you know they definitely cannot die -and especially if you demonstrate that even if they do die it will only be a temporary inconvenience- that rather undermines any future attempts at creating a sense of jeopardy. Comic book fans might accept that as an established standard of the medium; I think a normal audience considers 'OMG he's dead!! ... lol just kidding he's fine again' to just be lame.
I agree. And it's not like the character is really gone forever, because the story can always be retold.
