40sJohn

Don't worry, you will get your money's worth with this movie. WB spent big bucks making it and it shows on the screen. There is plenty to love about it, but I can also see where critics had their issues. Enjoy it!

Nice research! It's a little harder to argue with the director But I'll give it a go... I understand your view about the parallels and wouldn't say you're wrong. Everyone has their own viewpoint. However, looking at Man of Steel, I don't see these as intentional Christlike references. I suspect in the interview, Snyder was pandering to a conspiracy theory concocted by a brood of vipers. He implied there are similarities between Christ and Superman in the Superman mythos. There aren't... Going back to my previous post, there is confusion between Christlike and godlike. Either he was mistaken or he saw it as an easier win over the critics. My guess would be the latter. The Superman we see in MoS and BvS can fly, shoot fire from his eyes and emerge unscathed from collapsing buildings. Those are the powers of a pre-Biblical heathen god, not Jesus. I appreciate there is the scene NEG referred to where his arms are outstretched but to me that signifies the majesty of floating in space. For the most part, he looks more like this... This is my viewpoint based on my understanding of Superman. I wouldn't expect others to share it Thanks for sharing and I can see where you are coming from with the movies. No doubt the directors want Superman to relate to us in many ways and do a good job of putting various elements in the movie to achieve that connection. Per your screen image, I think we can agree on a few things. One, we all dig Superman's heat vision and I especially like Zack's take on it. And... Superman can be one bad mofo when the situation calls for it.

Just because some of us are predicting that it will not hit expected box office targets doesn't mean we want it to fail. Even though I don't like the track this movie took with my favorite comic character and was disappointed walking out of the theater, I want this movie to succeed. I want to be the only one that didn't love the movie. This movie was very, very well done from a production standpoint, and casting and several other perspectives. However, I did not enjoy part of the plot and it nearly ruined the movie for me. There is a remaining disappointment of what could have been, but I am hopeful and convinced that WB will fix some things and this franchise will do much better in the upcoming movies.

As David pointed out earlier, Zack was most definitely aware of the spiritual connotations of Supes in MoS. Again, I don't think Zack is as obvious as Bryan Singer was, but nonetheless the parallels are there. First the short Bryan Singer article that helps explain the screen shot above. Bryan Singer explains failure of Superman Returns And a short article about Zack's take on Man of Steel Zack interview

You're talking about the minutia. Packing content into 2.3 hours isn't justification for a favorable review unless the content serves a cohesive story revolving around characters we care about. When discussing superheroes and science it's always a stretch of the imagination. We are asked to suspend disbelief. That goes for Marvel product and DC, ...and all things in between. The problem with Zack's take on Superman has nothing to do with the pseudo-scientific aspects of his Kryptonian power. This is all about subtext and the message Zack's BvS film sends. It goes back to the first film, MoS, where Mr. Snyder established his controversial take on the character. Most of the criticism of MoS was driven by the cynical albeit successful marketing strategy to approach ministers and show them pre-release versions that played up Christian friendly aspects of the film. Then they were asked to endorse it and recommend it to their congregations. Heavy handed religious metaphors we're woven into the story making the character into a depressingly serious, angst-driven seeker of redemption. Along with lame death scene of Pa Kent and the uncomfortably misogynistic portrayal of women (Lois.especially) MoS pushed all the wrong buttons. I only mention this to set the stage for the critical train wreck of BvS that followed. Since I refuse to support films that offend my deeply held view that superheroes should embody positive attributes and be an entertaining fantasy without any preconceived or cynically motivated studio agenda I've chosen to forego the "pleasure" of paying to see BvS. I'm relying on the consensus of highly qualified reviews to assess whether Zack's vision of the character has evolved or remained uncomfortably dystopian and angst-driven. I won't review the picture (that would be disingenuous), but it's entirely fair and reasonable to express shared disappointment with those who've been treated to more of the same jumbled mess and convoluted apocryphal messaging that permitted the first film. You're right, great movies aren't perfect either, but when it comes to cynical film-making you have to draw the line somewhere. Interesting tidbit that I had never heard. I am a man of faith, deeply Christian, and yet I never had anyone at our church or denomination recommend MoS. However, I would contend that the Christ like similarities of Superman were first heavily stressed in Superman Returns. In fact, I used sections of the movie in bible study lessons. While I think MoS continues some of those same ideals, they were not near as obvious as in the previous movie. From my perspective, there are no Christ-like similarities in MoS or BvS. As for Superman Returns, I'd have to re-watch it... There is confusion between "Christ-like" and "godlike" - note the lowercase "g". Superman being perceived as godlike is an established part of the mythos. Looking at the words in bold type above, I find it hard to believe with all the violence in MoS, it would be seen as "Christian friendly". The only time in the movie Superman turned the other cheek, it happened to be Zod's... Here is a screen shot from Superman Returns. No doubt certain imagery was used within that movie to relate Superman with Christ, not just a god. As to MoS and BvS, I think you are correct that the more obvious similarity is with Supes being a god-like figure, however, as a Christian I do see some more similarities with Jesus than other religious figures. (Except of course with some specific actions like, as you said, turning Zod's cheek. Btw, good one!) This makes me think of the scene from "Cool Hand Luke" after he eats the 50 eggs. The director turned him into a Christ figure on the table. http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1871/2060/1600/Cool%20Hand%20Luke%20cruciform.jpg Thanks for that link! I never had seen that before. Cool Hand Luke is a classic!

You're talking about the minutia. Packing content into 2.3 hours isn't justification for a favorable review unless the content serves a cohesive story revolving around characters we care about. When discussing superheroes and science it's always a stretch of the imagination. We are asked to suspend disbelief. That goes for Marvel product and DC, ...and all things in between. The problem with Zack's take on Superman has nothing to do with the pseudo-scientific aspects of his Kryptonian power. This is all about subtext and the message Zack's BvS film sends. It goes back to the first film, MoS, where Mr. Snyder established his controversial take on the character. Most of the criticism of MoS was driven by the cynical albeit successful marketing strategy to approach ministers and show them pre-release versions that played up Christian friendly aspects of the film. Then they were asked to endorse it and recommend it to their congregations. Heavy handed religious metaphors we're woven into the story making the character into a depressingly serious, angst-driven seeker of redemption. Along with lame death scene of Pa Kent and the uncomfortably misogynistic portrayal of women (Lois.especially) MoS pushed all the wrong buttons. I only mention this to set the stage for the critical train wreck of BvS that followed. Since I refuse to support films that offend my deeply held view that superheroes should embody positive attributes and be an entertaining fantasy without any preconceived or cynically motivated studio agenda I've chosen to forego the "pleasure" of paying to see BvS. I'm relying on the consensus of highly qualified reviews to assess whether Zack's vision of the character has evolved or remained uncomfortably dystopian and angst-driven. I won't review the picture (that would be disingenuous), but it's entirely fair and reasonable to express shared disappointment with those who've been treated to more of the same jumbled mess and convoluted apocryphal messaging that permitted the first film. You're right, great movies aren't perfect either, but when it comes to cynical film-making you have to draw the line somewhere. Interesting tidbit that I had never heard. I am a man of faith, deeply Christian, and yet I never had anyone at our church or denomination recommend MoS. However, I would contend that the Christ like similarities of Superman were first heavily stressed in Superman Returns. In fact, I used sections of the movie in bible study lessons. While I think MoS continues some of those same ideals, they were not near as obvious as in the previous movie. From my perspective, there are no Christ-like similarities in MoS or BvS. As for Superman Returns, I'd have to re-watch it... There is confusion between "Christ-like" and "godlike" - note the lowercase "g". Superman being perceived as godlike is an established part of the mythos. Looking at the words in bold type above, I find it hard to believe with all the violence in MoS, it would be seen as "Christian friendly". The only time in the movie Superman turned the other cheek, it happened to be Zod's... Here is a screen shot from Superman Returns. No doubt certain imagery was used within that movie to relate Superman with Christ, not just a god. As to MoS and BvS, I think you are correct that the more obvious similarity is with Supes being a god-like figure, however, as a Christian I do see some more similarities with Jesus than other religious figures. (Except of course with some specific actions like, as you said, turning Zod's cheek. Btw, good one!)

You're talking about the minutia. Packing content into 2.3 hours isn't justification for a favorable review unless the content serves a cohesive story revolving around characters we care about. When discussing superheroes and science it's always a stretch of the imagination. We are asked to suspend disbelief. That goes for Marvel product and DC, ...and all things in between. The problem with Zack's take on Superman has nothing to do with the pseudo-scientific aspects of his Kryptonian power. This is all about subtext and the message Zack's BvS film sends. It goes back to the first film, MoS, where Mr. Snyder established his controversial take on the character. Most of the criticism of MoS was driven by the cynical albeit successful marketing strategy to approach ministers and show them pre-release versions that played up Christian friendly aspects of the film. Then they were asked to endorse it and recommend it to their congregations. Heavy handed religious metaphors we're woven into the story making the character into a depressingly serious, angst-driven seeker of redemption. Along with lame death scene of Pa Kent and the uncomfortably misogynistic portrayal of women (Lois.especially) MoS pushed all the wrong buttons. I only mention this to set the stage for the critical train wreck of BvS that followed. Since I refuse to support films that offend my deeply held view that superheroes should embody positive attributes and be an entertaining fantasy without any preconceived or cynically motivated studio agenda I've chosen to forego the "pleasure" of paying to see BvS. I'm relying on the consensus of highly qualified reviews to assess whether Zack's vision of the character has evolved or remained uncomfortably dystopian and angst-driven. I won't review the picture (that would be disingenuous), but it's entirely fair and reasonable to express shared disappointment with those who've been treated to more of the same jumbled mess and convoluted apocryphal messaging that permitted the first film. You're right, great movies aren't perfect either, but when it comes to cynical film-making you have to draw the line somewhere. Interesting tidbit that I had never heard. I am a man of faith, deeply Christian, and yet I never had anyone at our church or denomination recommend MoS. However, I would contend that the Christ like similarities of Superman were first heavily stressed in Superman Returns. In fact, I used sections of the movie in bible study lessons. While I think MoS continues some of those same ideals, they were not near as obvious as in the previous movie.

I think it is an underperformer.

Although it would be super for DC/Warner if the movie did cross $1 Billion, I think its 3.2X over budget is already saying a lot. Even with a story that has caused a strong difference of opinion over content and direction. What else did this movie deliver on that Warner needed badly? - Launch point for the DCCU - DC merchandising at retailers which was sorely lacking for years (Lego, action figures, posters, etc.) - Ultimate Edition pre-order Blu-Ray/DVD set (July 16th release) - Product placement revenue (Turkish Airlines, Aston Martin, Microsoft Lumia 950 smartphone, Under Armour, Samsung Notebook 9, 2016 Jeep Renegade, Ford Mustang, Jolly Ranchers ) I think this movie will turn out just fine. Especially with Warner added those two extra dates to its release calendar. Something must be going well. I love the fact this movie will pull a profit and probably a decent one. If anything, it shows the population has not been oversaturated with superhero flicks which is good for us comic book guys. However, I have to believe there are some theater owners that are gnashing their teeth over the money they could have made if this movie just tweaked a few things. My guess is that WB learns from this, makes the needed tweaks and will have some huge profits going forward. I especially like the idea of Afleck getting the Batman movies to act and direct.

If you like comics, go see it. It really is an above average movie from many aspects. However, there are some things from an overall story standpoint that could have been done better. Regardless, it is well worth the price of admission and you will get your money's worth on the screen. I paid to see it in the first week it was out, and while one certain aspect did not sit well with me and wish the writing team would have gone in another direction, I did not feel cheated or mad that I had paid to see in the theater with much dinero spent on concessions. Last night; $4.20 for a SMALL Diet Coke... Go to 2 large cokes and popcorn and you get to pay $20. BTW, how did you like the movie?

If you like comics, go see it. It really is an above average movie from many aspects. However, there are some things from an overall story standpoint that could have been done better. Regardless, it is well worth the price of admission and you will get your money's worth on the screen. I paid to see it in the first week it was out, and while one certain aspect did not sit well with me and wish the writing team would have gone in another direction, I did not feel cheated or mad that I had paid to see in the theater with much dinero spent on concessions.

Interesting conversation in this thread about what constitutes a success. Seems to me based on the financials so far, it is a success but has left, I think, a lot on the table. If this movie had gotten a 80%+ in favorable reviews, I think it would blow out 1B without a sweat. Fact is this movie had a huge opening week due to it being a superhero movie with two of the biggest comic characters of all time. The superhero genre is still a draw to a lot of people that want to see big action on the big screen. I would argue that Marvel's success with the Avengers and the solo characters set the table for BvS to make it big. Add in the success of the prior Batman movies and this movie had $1B written all over it, with a shot at $1.5B or higher if it appealed to more people. However, this movie is dark and is better received by a smaller audience than the general public. The general public, likes a more upbeat, bam-pow type of movie than what Zack Snyder gave us. This is a well acted, big budge,t thoughtful movie. It held my interest with no problem, but I left feeling empty, almost numb. That is what hurt this movie with the critics and will hurt it's chancing of being one of the biggest blockbusters of all time. So is it a success? Yeah, I would say so. However, I don't think Snyder can turn out a similarly paced, dark sequel and have it make these numbers.

Good. That's my second biggest complaint with BvS, after the fact that Batman was too out of character for my taste. Bad. Some of us don't want the mood lightened. We have Marvel for those guys. But I guess whatever the masses want... I get what you're saying, and I like the fact that it's not a Marvel movie. It is more complex, but somehow they've got to find a way to make the general audience feel like the weight of the activities in the movie at least pays off in some sort of "feel good" moment at the end or be an accumulation of feel-good moments during the movie. Those moments just didn't exist. Beating some non-descript monster (which is how the non-comic reading community would see Doomsday) that was created in the last 20 minutes of the movie, just wasn't a big payoff. There was no buildup with Doomsday other than being a proxy for Luthor, which didn't come across as a big deal either.

Good. That's my second biggest complaint with BvS, after the fact that Batman was too out of character for my taste.

That's my fear

So, is this not a straight lift from the movie 300? Totally wrong choice of music. It took me out of BvS and put me in 300 for a several seconds.

Glad to see that Zach Snyder likes Superman but disagree with his way of showing it. Is it so hard to give us a movie that has some levity in it, except the one scene when WW shows up that was totally spoiled by the trailers? I have no problems with somewhat dark movies, especially when Batman is involved, but this one seemed to go over the edge and sucked the fun out of a dream matchup. How about giving us a movie that let's me leave the theater feeling uplifted by the final scenes instead of bummed? Don't get me wrong, I like the effort and budget and attention to detail that this movie received. It's a dream come true to see superhero movies getting the attention and focus from the major studios. This was a bigtime movie that looked big time on the screen. I like the actors and thought they turned in fantastic performances. Holly Hunter's scene in the courtroom with Supes was incredible. Henry Cavill makes a great superman and Gal was very good with WW. Affleck made a great Batman and even better Bruce Wayne. No complaints on this part of the movie, but dang it just seemed wasted with the overall storyline. I will watch it again, and maybe it will grow on me, but for now I'd rather see The Force Awakens again and maybe a few more times before catching BvS. This is a superhero movie that just didn't feel like one. I don't mind the slow start to the movie, but give me a payoff that makes it worth it. Sorry but I didn't feel like it produced on that end.

Great review and I followed this logic during the course of the movie. However, my problem with the movie is, Why did we have to go down this road at all? Why do we need a cynical, kill everything Batman? Plus the majority of the Batman we get to see in the movie is a heavily armored antihero. Lex makes no sense in this movie and I don't like the way the other justice league members are introduced. While I was on the Zack Snyder bandwagon after MOS, I am off of it now. I wish there was a way to get him off the project.

Just got back from seeing this movie. Let me preface my review by saying I love superhero movies and have enjoyed most of them with few exceptions. I really liked Man of Steel and thought Zack Snyder did a great job with it. I also have not read any reviews before seeing the movie so I would give it a fair chance. However, I was aware the tomatometer was 41% rotten. Now, my review.

Bangzoom, Anyway you would be willing to post some Adventure Comics, pre-hero issues from issue number 32 to 39? Just some incredible art in this run.

Here is mine that I purchased from Flaming Telepath several years ago at one of the first VCC's, before the prices really took off.

How is that only a 7.5?

Just held a Flash mini marathon on Delta flight returning from France for episodes of last season that I missed. Solid, solid stuff.

Really enjoying this show. My wife, who is by no means even close to being a comic geek, likes it more than me. She will hunt it out to watch it. The CW is doing a very good job of presenting the DC Universe. This show is very watchable by the general viewing public mostly because it gets film making 101 correct - putting good actors with a compelling story and then giving them good writing. The Flash is so much better than Agents of Shield when it first started. It tooks months for AoS to get its footing whereas the Flash had it in a few episodes. Good job CW and DC!

Watched in via On Demand last night and... I enjoyed it! This was unexpected. I wasn't looking forward to it, didn't really care that they were doing a Supergirl show, but it was well done. I like the actress, the -script, and the action sequences. This is a family show and I appreciate it for that. I will be watching again.