Superman Movie

[Aman619]

just saw it and was impressed. I had little hope Warner Bros would succeed in making a Marvel worthy film out of Superman after GL and the last Superman. They really went to school and avoided all the pitfalls. They should be full steam ahead in getting the rest of their characters films into theatres over the next 5 years.

 

My favorite part early on was when we see the rocket from Krypton coming to earth, after a looong opening scene on Krypton, I was dreading the same old origin story , meaning uh oh, here comes 20 minutes in Smallville!! But the decision to keep skipping around was great.

 

I have problems with the noise and destruction etc etc, but can you believe we are at the point in filmmaking when these incredible scenes we've ben reading are now so "effortlessly" brought to life? Flying ballet super-battes? Pulsating energy fields as cool as Kirbly crackles?? Eye candy!

[Cat-Man_America]

I actually cant wait to hear from Jon, who started this thread after all. When was the last time you went into court and said, "Ugh!" and the judge let you stop there Jon?

 

Okay, I was actually bored by some of the scenes that went on forever. I thought the movie was overwelhmed by special effects. Three people in the show I went to left.

 

I thought the best exchanges were between Clark and Jonathan.

 

I also have this thing about a guy getting bashed through 30 buildings and have it blow up but his hair is in perfect order and he has no soot on his face. Trivial I know. I thought Lois in the old alien ship with Clark was contrived. I guess I should be less of an old fogey and engage in a little more "willing suspension of disbelief".

 

Sorry, it just did not do it for me. Glad others were real happy with it. The non-comic folks were hopefully entertained based on its opening week-end totals. I find it great when the non-believers get a glimpse of our world........jon

 

 

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]Superman was a major disappointment on several levels, and I really tried to like it.

 

I'll spare folks my snarky review rather than impinge upon the cinematic rapture of friends, but this version of The Man of Steel is far from stainless.[/font]

[bane]

9/10 - All kinds of awesome.

 

I'm not a Superman fan in terms of reading the comics, I'm a huge Batman fanboy. So I didn't go into the movie wanting another homage to Chris Reeve (cough Superman Returns cough) or have any comic book hangups as I cannot recall ever reading a Superman comic.

 

I thought it was an excellent film, full of action, emotion and story telling. Excellent cast as well. Can't wait to see it again.

 

Someone mentioned Iron Man 3? Sorry but this beats IM3 and throws it in the phantom zone.

[DeliBebek]

This trope has been around for a long time but does anyone else find it odd that one of the world's leading scientists appears in person before a small council of leaders, and they were completely unaware of the nature of his research or his findings until he spoke them in person? At least there may be an audience of his peers to question his methods and his conclusions, even if there is no venue for publishing and disseminating new ideas.

[nearmint]

This trope has been around for a long time but does anyone else find it odd that one of the world's leading scientists appears in person before a small council of leaders, and they were completely unaware of the nature of his research or his findings until he spoke them in person? At least there may be an audience of his peers to question his methods and his conclusions, even if there is no venue for publishing and disseminating new ideas.

 

I'm surprised when our congressman are able to to tie their own shoes. I can't imagine they're studied up on what our leading scientists are working on.

[Straw-Man]

i thought they all wore loafers for precisely that reason.

[ciorac]

loved it, loved it, loved it. did i mention i loved it?

 

[AmazingSaul]

I really liked the movie and now I will buy more superman comics.

[Cat-Man_America]

9/10 - All kinds of awesome.

 

I'm not a Superman fan in terms of reading the comics, I'm a huge Batman fanboy. So I didn't go into the movie wanting another homage to Chris Reeve (cough Superman Returns cough) or have any comic book hangups as I cannot recall ever reading a Superman comic.

 

I thought it was an excellent film, full of action, emotion and story telling. Excellent cast as well. Can't wait to see it again.

 

Someone mentioned Iron Man 3? Sorry but this beats IM3 and throws it in the phantom zone.

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[font:Times New Roman] I'd rather not get into a debate on the merits of this flick (or lack thereof) as I don't wish to publicly trash a film that others seem to enjoy so much, but comparing this version of Superman to IM3 was just too much.

 

Robert Downey could've phoned-in a better performance than Henry Cavill. Where the scripted dialogue in IM3 is crisp and clever, the writing in MoS is lugubrious.

 

No offense to those who love the new Superman, but my take is that Iron Man thoroughly trounces Zack Snyder's pedestrian attempt to resurrect this franchise. Knowledge of the manipulative marketing practices employed to pump-up the BO numbers makes me dislike this film even more.

 

This was the review that I held back. I'm posting it in spoilers and would encourage my friends who strongly like this film NOT to read it:

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]I approached watching Man of Steel with no expectations and very few preconceived notions outside of the mostly positive comments from folks on the boards. I've tried to avoid all of the mixed reviews and spoilers provided by professional critics on Rotten Tomatoes and other on-line opinionators. FTR, I really wanted to like this movie.

 

On the plus side, the shaky-cam stuff wasn't nearly as bad as I'd feared and I ended up liking Laurence Fishburne's take on Perry White. The actors playing Clark (Henry Cavill) and Lois (Amy Adams) were pretty much a wash, meaning their performances were serviceable, but far from riveting. The Jor-El character has always been a thankless role, but like Fishburne, Russell Crowe brought his first tier acting to the set. While this made the picture watchable, Crowe's and Fishburne's performances also highlighted the weaknesses of the leads.

 

Indifferent acting of the principals notwithstanding, Superman's rebooted origin was pretty pedestrian, but for the most part the back story remains grounded in the traditions of the character. Unfortunately, awkward flashbacks slowed the pacing without actually moving the story forward and the sketchiness of those disjointed childhood recollections provided the barest cliff-note character development.

 

I was underwhelmed by the overtly heavy-handed use of religious metaphor in marketing the film, but I have to admit as a sales tool it was pure genius (that is faint praise). Foregoing the marketing contrivance, the misunderstood alien as second coming parable has been done before as exemplified by Robert Wise's classic The Day the Earth Stood Still, an infinitely better film with an abundance of subtlety and wit in it's symbolism.

 

In the end, I felt this film struggled with a humorless plot that relied on forced angst to persuade the audience of it's humanity. The effects were piled on to the point of cliche` that left the unavoidable impression of watching a non-interactive video game with a Zack Snyder wielding the joystick. It seemed like Warners had been sold the idea that if the competition can make New York into a battleground for the Avengers movie, by golly our FX department will produce a smack-down that demolishes the entire city.

 

Of course, the Avengers succeeded with warmth, humor, pacing, character development and Joss Whedon's skilled direction.

 

Alas, one notable thing missing from Man of Steel was a virtual body counter at the bottom of the screen to inform theater goers of how many CGI humans were being snuffed out off screen with each building collapse. Who knows, it might've added a bit more intensity to an otherwise maudlin motion picture, but I doubt that my POV will have any impact Zack's high score.[/font]

 

 

 

Merryweather rating for the Man of Rust: (...and I'm being generous!)

 

'Nuff said. [/font]

[nearmint]

Gosh(and I do mean gosh), I think I disagree with every single point in your review.

[bane]

9/10 - All kinds of awesome.

 

I'm not a Superman fan in terms of reading the comics, I'm a huge Batman fanboy. So I didn't go into the movie wanting another homage to Chris Reeve (cough Superman Returns cough) or have any comic book hangups as I cannot recall ever reading a Superman comic.

 

I thought it was an excellent film, full of action, emotion and story telling. Excellent cast as well. Can't wait to see it again.

 

Someone mentioned Iron Man 3? Sorry but this beats IM3 and throws it in the phantom zone.

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[font:Times New Roman] I'd rather not get into a debate on the merits of this flick (or lack thereof) as I don't wish to publicly trash a film that others seem to enjoy so much, but comparing this version of Superman to IM3 was just too much.

 

Robert Downey could've phoned-in a better performance than Henry Cavill. Where the scripted dialogue in IM3 is crisp and clever, the writing in MoS is lugubrious.

 

No offense to those who love the new Superman, but my take is that Iron Man thoroughly trounces Zack Snyder's pedestrian attempt to resurrect this franchise. Knowledge of the manipulative marketing practices employed to pump-up the BO numbers makes me dislike this film even more.

 

This was the review that I held back. I'm posting it in spoilers and would encourage my friends who strongly like this film NOT to read it:

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]I approached watching Man of Steel with no expectations and very few preconceived notions outside of the mostly positive comments from folks on the boards. I've tried to avoid all of the mixed reviews and spoilers provided by professional critics on Rotten Tomatoes and other on-line opinionators. FTR, I really wanted to like this movie.

 

On the plus side, the shaky-cam stuff wasn't nearly as bad as I'd feared and I ended up liking Laurence Fishburne's take on Perry White. The actors playing Clark (Henry Cavill) and Lois (Amy Adams) were pretty much a wash, meaning their performances were serviceable, but far from riveting. The Jor-El character has always been a thankless role, but like Fishburne, Russell Crowe brought his first tier acting to the set. While this made the picture watchable, Crowe's and Fishburne's performances also highlighted the weaknesses of the leads.

 

Indifferent acting of the principals notwithstanding, Superman's rebooted origin was pretty pedestrian, but for the most part the back story remains grounded in the traditions of the character. Unfortunately, awkward flashbacks slowed the pacing without actually moving the story forward and the sketchiness of those disjointed childhood recollections provided the barest cliff-note character development.

 

I was underwhelmed by the overtly heavy-handed use of religious metaphor in marketing the film, but I have to admit as a sales tool it was pure genius (that is faint praise). Foregoing the marketing contrivance, the misunderstood alien as second coming parable has been done before as exemplified by Robert Wise's classic The Day the Earth Stood Still, an infinitely better film with an abundance of subtlety and wit in it's symbolism.

 

In the end, I felt this film struggled with a humorless plot that relied on forced angst to persuade the audience of it's humanity. The effects were piled on to the point of cliche` that left the unavoidable impression of watching a non-interactive video game with a Zack Snyder wielding the joystick. It seemed like Warners had been sold the idea that if the competition can make New York into a battleground for the Avengers movie, by golly our FX department will produce a smack-down that demolishes the entire city.

 

Of course, the Avengers succeeded with warmth, humor, pacing, character development and Joss Whedon's skilled direction.

 

Alas, one notable thing missing from Man of Steel was a virtual body counter at the bottom of the screen to inform theater goers of how many CGI humans were being snuffed out off screen with each building collapse. Who knows, it might've added a bit more intensity to an otherwise maudlin motion picture, but I doubt that my POV will have any impact Zack's high score.[/font]

 

 

 

Merryweather rating for the Man of Rust: (...and I'm being generous!)

 

'Nuff said. [/font]

 

The Avengers had great action and slapstick humour, it worked, it was awesome but it lacked any kind of emotion. Certain scenes in MoS really captivated me, especially a lot of the bully scenes where you could feel Clark struggle to cope with the great power that he has and wanting to lash out.

 

Scenes with Kevin Costner, even the simple hand gesture as the tornado swept him away sticks with me, Clark looking on in horror.

 

The Avengers had Agent Coulson getting stabbed by Loki and to be honest, I really couldn't care.

 

As for action, I'd rather see Superman/Zod go at it for 30 minutes then see Tony Stark barely spend any time in the Iron Man suit and take out a load of goons with a Nintendo powerglove.

 

But that's just me.

[ComicConnoisseur]

Saw it. Loved it. Wanna see it again.

The best part is a whole new generation of fans love it. This puts Superman back on the map with Batman and Captain America! (thumbs u

I hope now Hollywood can make Plastic Man,Captain Marvel, Shadow,Flash Gordon, Tracy and Tarzan movies at the level of the Man of Steel.

[Cat-Man_America]

Gosh(and I do mean gosh), I think I disagree with every single point in your review.

 

[font:Times New Roman]That's why I'm trying to avoid debating the film's merits.

 

Having seen MoS I'm having difficulty understanding why anyone loves it. .....

[/font]

[nearmint]

Gosh(and I do mean gosh), I think I disagree with every single point in your review.

 

[font:Times New Roman]That's why I'm trying to avoid debating the film's merits.

 

Having seen MoS I'm having difficulty understanding why anyone loves it. .....

[/font]

 

Because it's a damn good movie.

[Cat-Man_America]

9/10 - All kinds of awesome.

 

I'm not a Superman fan in terms of reading the comics, I'm a huge Batman fanboy. So I didn't go into the movie wanting another homage to Chris Reeve (cough Superman Returns cough) or have any comic book hangups as I cannot recall ever reading a Superman comic.

 

I thought it was an excellent film, full of action, emotion and story telling. Excellent cast as well. Can't wait to see it again.

 

Someone mentioned Iron Man 3? Sorry but this beats IM3 and throws it in the phantom zone.

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[font:Times New Roman] I'd rather not get into a debate on the merits of this flick (or lack thereof) as I don't wish to publicly trash a film that others seem to enjoy so much, but comparing this version of Superman to IM3 was just too much.

 

Robert Downey could've phoned-in a better performance than Henry Cavill. Where the scripted dialogue in IM3 is crisp and clever, the writing in MoS is lugubrious.

 

No offense to those who love the new Superman, but my take is that Iron Man thoroughly trounces Zack Snyder's pedestrian attempt to resurrect this franchise. Knowledge of the manipulative marketing practices employed to pump-up the BO numbers makes me dislike this film even more.

 

This was the review that I held back. I'm posting it in spoilers and would encourage my friends who strongly like this film NOT to read it:

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]I approached watching Man of Steel with no expectations and very few preconceived notions outside of the mostly positive comments from folks on the boards. I've tried to avoid all of the mixed reviews and spoilers provided by professional critics on Rotten Tomatoes and other on-line opinionators. FTR, I really wanted to like this movie.

 

On the plus side, the shaky-cam stuff wasn't nearly as bad as I'd feared and I ended up liking Laurence Fishburne's take on Perry White. The actors playing Clark (Henry Cavill) and Lois (Amy Adams) were pretty much a wash, meaning their performances were serviceable, but far from riveting. The Jor-El character has always been a thankless role, but like Fishburne, Russell Crowe brought his first tier acting to the set. While this made the picture watchable, Crowe's and Fishburne's performances also highlighted the weaknesses of the leads.

 

Indifferent acting of the principals notwithstanding, Superman's rebooted origin was pretty pedestrian, but for the most part the back story remains grounded in the traditions of the character. Unfortunately, awkward flashbacks slowed the pacing without actually moving the story forward and the sketchiness of those disjointed childhood recollections provided the barest cliff-note character development.

 

I was underwhelmed by the overtly heavy-handed use of religious metaphor in marketing the film, but I have to admit as a sales tool it was pure genius (that is faint praise). Foregoing the marketing contrivance, the misunderstood alien as second coming parable has been done before as exemplified by Robert Wise's classic The Day the Earth Stood Still, an infinitely better film with an abundance of subtlety and wit in it's symbolism.

 

In the end, I felt this film struggled with a humorless plot that relied on forced angst to persuade the audience of it's humanity. The effects were piled on to the point of cliche` that left the unavoidable impression of watching a non-interactive video game with a Zack Snyder wielding the joystick. It seemed like Warners had been sold the idea that if the competition can make New York into a battleground for the Avengers movie, by golly our FX department will produce a smack-down that demolishes the entire city.

 

Of course, the Avengers succeeded with warmth, humor, pacing, character development and Joss Whedon's skilled direction.

 

Alas, one notable thing missing from Man of Steel was a virtual body counter at the bottom of the screen to inform theater goers of how many CGI humans were being snuffed out off screen with each building collapse. Who knows, it might've added a bit more intensity to an otherwise maudlin motion picture, but I doubt that my POV will have any impact Zack's high score.[/font]

 

 

 

Merryweather rating for the Man of Rust: (...and I'm being generous!)

 

'Nuff said. [/font]

 

The Avengers had great action and slapstick humour, it worked, it was awesome but it lacked any kind of emotion. Certain scenes in MoS really captivated me, especially a lot of the bully scenes where you could feel Clark struggle to cope with the great power that he has and wanting to lash out.

 

Scenes with Kevin Costner, even the simple hand gesture as the tornado swept him away sticks with me, Clark looking on in horror.

 

The Avengers had Agent Coulson getting stabbed by Loki and to be honest, I really couldn't care.

 

As for action, I'd rather see Superman/Zod go at it for 30 minutes then see Tony Stark barely spend any time in the Iron Man suit and take out a load of goons with a Nintendo powerglove.

 

But that's just me.

 

[font:Times New Roman]Different strokes I guess...[/font]

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]I understand and respect your POV, but my perspective differs significantly.

 

1. Avengers had wry verbal humor, much more than slapstick, and it balanced the action, never overshadowed it. The emotional content was never brooding and angst driven like a soap-opera on steroids, but there was plenty of content for those who care about characters being respectful to the original comics. IOW, it was fun, something totally lacking in MoS (in my opinion).

 

Conversely, Clark's struggle to cope with his power as a teen was handled much better in the Smallville TV series than MoS.

 

2. The scenes with Costner weren't bad except for that one of him waving back from the tornado. Alas, that save the dog sequence was painfully hokey, cookie-cutter stuff. There were actual giggles in the audience. Of course, this is a Texas audience, we KNOW tornados and the value of a good dog.

 

BTW, that take refuge under the overpass advice is terrible misinformation to give the public. Weather experts say that's the worst place to go with a twister headed your way.

 

3. Agent Coulson was one of the least developed characters in the Avengers, but his actions and death at Loki's hands provided an extra touch of humanity for the audience to connect with in a story otherwise dominated by bigger than life super characters. Sorry his scenes didn't work for you.

 

4. If action is all that sets these films apart then we can judge by grading the FX quality and gauge our differences of opinion there. For me, it's as much about the back-story, plotting and character development as the gosh-wow battle sequences.

Suspension of disbelief is a combination of actors who can sell a great yarn and having a story worth telling.

 

Of course, that's just me. YMMV[/font] (thumbs u

 

 

 

[Cat-Man_America]

Gosh(and I do mean gosh), I think I disagree with every single point in your review.

 

[font:Times New Roman]That's why I'm trying to avoid debating the film's merits.

 

Having seen MoS I'm having difficulty understanding why anyone loves it. .....

[/font]

 

Because it's a damn good movie.

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]Prove it![/font]

[nearmint]

Gosh(and I do mean gosh), I think I disagree with every single point in your review.

 

[font:Times New Roman]That's why I'm trying to avoid debating the film's merits.

 

Having seen MoS I'm having difficulty understanding why anyone loves it. .....

[/font]

 

Because it's a damn good movie.

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]Prove it![/font]

 

Marvel movies have for the most part been entertaining, but have never once affected me emotionally. MOS did. That's how I measure a film's quality.

[Cat-Man_America]

Gosh(and I do mean gosh), I think I disagree with every single point in your review.

 

[font:Times New Roman]That's why I'm trying to avoid debating the film's merits.

 

Having seen MoS I'm having difficulty understanding why anyone loves it. .....

[/font]

 

Because it's a damn good movie.

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]Prove it![/font]

 

Marvel movies have for the most part been entertaining, but have never once affected me emotionally. MOS did. That's how I measure a film's quality.

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]Well, you got me there. I did manage to shed a tear or two for MoS the next time I opened my wallet.[/font]

[Ameri]

I think Man of Steel was THE BEST superhero movie I've ever seen. The material was handled with respect and, unlike the Avengers, the wisecracks were kept at a minimum. Unlike Green Lantern, there were no dead spots in this movie. The first scene of Superman flying reminded me of the Fleischer cartoons which I'm sure was intentional. The uncanny resemblance between Henry Cavill and Christopher Reeves connects the Reeves films in a way with the new one. A big 5 thumbs up!

 

[nearmint]

Gosh(and I do mean gosh), I think I disagree with every single point in your review.

 

[font:Times New Roman]That's why I'm trying to avoid debating the film's merits.

 

Having seen MoS I'm having difficulty understanding why anyone loves it. .....

[/font]

 

Because it's a damn good movie.

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]Prove it![/font]

 

Marvel movies have for the most part been entertaining, but have never once affected me emotionally. MOS did. That's how I measure a film's quality.

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]Well, you got me there. I did manage to shed a tear or two for MoS the next time I opened my wallet.[/font]

 

Screenwriting rule #324: If you can make women in the audience cry, you've got a hit. If you can make the men cry, you've got a blockbuster.