Superman Movie

[Flex Mentallo]

I really enjoyed it for the over the top action and the brood mood that it created.

 

I do agree that all of the

destruction

was a little uncharacteristic of Supes but I guess much of it was out of his control.

 

The movie was a fun watch but it wasn't as deep as it could have been and it wasn't as Superman-like as I would have expected.

 

Christopher Reeves may not have thrown one punch in Superman 1 but you really got a sense of depth from the characters in that movie that seemed to be missing in this one. Maybe it was just edited that way and all the parts that developed character were cut out.

 

I think that if they took a few minutes of fighting out and added those minutes to character development the way they did with Batman - just an extra moment in a few key spots of the movie - it likely would have been more rewarding that way.

 

How about Superman takes his Mom to a safe place and then comes back to fight?

 

How about Superman saves the girl from the rubble and then goes back to fight?

 

Isn't that what Superman is all about?

 

Amy Adams is a terrific actress but she wasn't spunky enough in this flick. Heck, she was spunkier and made a better Lois in "Trouble With The Curve".

 

An extremely fun movie to watch but maybe a 7 out of 10. Would likely have been an 8 or a 9 out of 10 with just a few extra minutes of development.

 

Anyhow, that's my

 

I think that's well put, personally. It didn't want for breadth or daring - risks were taken that refreshed the familiar and recast overworked tropes in stimulating ways. For example, that Jor El isn't just a nerdy scientist but also some kind of ninja warrior, which had me thinking of Gladiator!

 

Conversely I do think Kal's human side was brought out.

 

I like Billy's point - if I may paraphrase to make my case counsellor - that the sheer apocalyptic scale of the destruction wrought made the battles more cathartic.

 

And I fail to recollect - has anyone mentioned Kal's agony at having to execute Zod in the station because he threatened never to stop killing humans?

 

I just don't understand why they stayed in the shallow end with respect to the deeper implications. Godlike powers wielded not by Gods but by flawed "human/alien" beings.

 

I think it would've made a very good movie even better , perhaps even profound, without being pretentious if played right. I really like this director too, and would have thought this well within his compass. I enjoyed what we got, just - having had the movie raise my expectations -wanted more.

 

I do think we will tire of CGI in the end, even though it makes it possible to put on film what otherwise happened only in our childhood imaginings..

[VintageComics]

I just don't understand why they stayed in the shallow end with respect to the deeper implications. Godlike powers wielded not by Gods but by flawed "human/alien" beings.

 

I think it would've made a very good movie even better , perhaps even profound, without being pretentious if played right. I really like this director too, and would have thought this well within his compass. I enjoyed what we got, just - having had the movie raise my expectations -wanted more.

 

I agree. I was looking for a little more depth and a slightly longer film may have done just that.

 

As mentioned in my post in the General Forum, I think just a few extra moments of development in a few keys spots might have made this feel like an entirely different movie with more depth - and maybe (hopefully) the director's cut will have more of that.

[Cat-Man_America]

I just don't understand why they stayed in the shallow end with respect to the deeper implications. Godlike powers wielded not by Gods but by flawed "human/alien" beings.

 

I think it would've made a very good movie even better , perhaps even profound, without being pretentious if played right. I really like this director too, and would have thought this well within his compass. I enjoyed what we got, just - having had the movie raise my expectations -wanted more.

 

I agree. I was looking for a little more depth and a slightly longer film may have done just that.

 

As mentioned in my post in the General Forum, I think just a few extra moments of development in a few keys spots might have made this feel like an entirely different movie with more depth - and maybe (hopefully) the director's cut will have more of that.

 

[font:Times New Roman]I'm not going to restate my views or get into the minutiae of problems I had with the film. From my perspective there was a lot wrong with this film, but it's success is bound to be good for DC character film & TV development and that's all that really matters in the long run. I'm glad that it found an audience.[/font] (thumbs u

[VintageComics]

Repost from the General forum:

 

Cripes, I just keep thinking about how awesome it was!! I might have to go again today...

 

This

 

 

“If it’s truly an origin story, his aversion to killing is unexplained,” Snyder said. “I felt like, if we could find a way of making it impossible for him - Kobayashi Maru, totally no way out - I felt like that could also make you go, ‘This is the why of him never killing again.’ He’s basically obliterated his entire people and his culture, and he is responsible for it, and he’s just, like, ‘How could I ever kill again?’”

 

 

really helped tie the movie together for me.

 

The movie really is about Supes still learning who he is, and from that perspective, I can see why all the destruction and the decisions he made are OK, because he hadn't yet made his mind up about it all.

 

So that little paragraph just helped me understand what they were trying to do.

 

Unfortunately, the movie didn't help me realize that. Maybe I missed it and it was there the entire time?

 

 

I did find it interesting that Supes they revealed that he was 33. That's a biblically significant "coming of age" number.

[Cat-Man_America]

Repost from the General forum:

 

Cripes, I just keep thinking about how awesome it was!! I might have to go again today...

 

This

 

 

“If it’s truly an origin story, his aversion to killing is unexplained,” Snyder said. “I felt like, if we could find a way of making it impossible for him - Kobayashi Maru, totally no way out - I felt like that could also make you go, ‘This is the why of him never killing again.’ He’s basically obliterated his entire people and his culture, and he is responsible for it, and he’s just, like, ‘How could I ever kill again?’”

 

 

really helped tie the movie together for me.

 

The movie really is about Supes still learning who he is, and from that perspective, I can see why all the destruction and the decisions he made are OK, because he hadn't yet made his mind up about it all.

 

So that little paragraph just helped me understand what they were trying to do.

 

Unfortunately, the movie didn't help me realize that. Maybe I missed it and it was there the entire time?

 

 

I did find it interesting that Supes they revealed that he was 33. That's a biblically significant "coming of age" number.

 

[font:Times New Roman]There was just way too much biblical iconography woven into the film for my liking. It was painfully obvious and manipulative.

 

I wasn't offended, just disappointed at the heavy-handedness of it. There was clearly a cynical marketing strategy involved. It took a lot of the fun out of Superman as a comic book character movie (for me).

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2343165/Man-Steel-marketers-target-Christians-sending-pastors-prepared-sermons-compare-Superman-Jesus-Christ.html [/font]

 

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

 

[Speedy-D]

Haters gonna hate!!

 

(it feels good to be on the side that likes the movie for once )

[VintageComics]

Superman was Jewish.

 

[Cat-Man_America]

Haters gonna hate!!

 

(it feels good to be on the side that likes the movie for once )

 

[font:Times New Roman]Sides? Who's taking sides?

 

Hate is too strong a word here (I reserve that for movies I walk out on or give a zero score).

 

As I see it, liking or disliking a film is a matter of personal taste. We're just discussing the merits, or the lack thereof.

 

I'm glad you enjoyed it. I'm not saying that the folks who love this flick have bad taste, ...differing standards of excellence perhaps, but not bad taste.[/font] (thumbs u

[Cat-Man_America]

Superman was Jewish.

 

 

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]

At one time, but not necessarily according to the money-changers who now own the franchise.

 

Here is an interesting article:

 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geekgoesrogue/2013/06/c-s-lewis-on-superman-and-being-christey/

 

...and an excerpt:

 

 

 

Arty Christian types are committing the mistake that C.S. Lewis addresses in his essay, “On Science Fiction”.

 

“Many reviews are useless because, while purporting to condemn the book, they only reveal the reviewer’s dislike of the kind to which it belongs. Let bad tragedies be censured by those who love tragedy, and bad detective stories by those who love the detective story. Otherwise we shall find epics blamed for not being novels, farces for not being high comedies, novels by James for lacking the swift action of Smollett.”

 

 

I've taken this to heart in my criticism of Superman, MoS. As a lifelong fan of SF and comics who appreciates well crafted films that embrace both genres, I feel pre-disposed to dissent when my views conflict with the status quo. There is no wrong or right perspective beyond fairly leveled criticism. Other viewpoints are correct as well, even those expressed by my fellow geeks who feel that critics of the film are over-thinking it.[/font]

[Flex Mentallo]

I overthink everything.

[Speedy-D]

Haters gonna hate!!

 

(it feels good to be on the side that likes the movie for once )

 

[font:Times New Roman]Sides? Who's taking sides?

 

Hate is too strong a word here (I reserve that for movies I walk out on or give a zero score).

 

As I see it, liking or disliking a film is a matter of personal taste. We're just discussing the merits, or the lack thereof.

 

I'm glad you enjoyed it. I'm not saying that the folks who love this flick have bad taste, ...differing standards of excellence perhaps, but not bad taste.[/font] (thumbs u

Yeesh, I'm just playing. Anyone can feel however they want about a movie, makes no difference to me.

 

Except Sucker Punch is the worst movie ever. And Man of Steel Rocks. Whoever disagrees is a hater and haters gonna hate!!

[goldust40]

Except Sucker Punch is the worst movie ever. And Man of Steel Rocks. Whoever disagrees is a hater and haters gonna hate!!

 

I would say the Spirit is the worst movie ever, although Sucker Punch runs it close. MOS rocks, no question about that.

[thedude]

here's my thoughts on Man of Steel:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=6803152#Post6803152

[50YrsCollctngCmcs]

With 100 degree weather in the LA Valleys it was the perfect movie day yesterday so the whole family went to see Man of Steel. The theater was 100% full for the 1:30 PM show. After reading a number of the reviews on here I wasn't expecting much but had heard some good buzz at work and from friends.

 

I loved it, and my wife and my son and daughter also thought it to be a great movie. The only element in retrospect that bothered me was Superman's resolution of the Zod conflict with respect to his earthly mission. But overall I think Warner / DC has a winner on their hands.

 

No complaints from me and I only hope they follow up with movies of equal caliber and light a fire under this franchise!

[nearmint]

(thumbs u

[tpetty]

I wasn't expecting much either - and thought all prior Superman movies were pretty bad - but I though it was GREAT! One of the best comic book based movies I've ever seen. Origin fleshed out (some liberties, as expected) and non stop action and building destruction. Great special effects.

[peewee22]

I agree. Zod did the best acting job to me. I loved it. Hats off / thumbs up to DC. (thumbs u

[Cat-Man_America]

With 100 degree weather in the LA Valleys it was the perfect movie day yesterday so the whole family went to see Man of Steel. The theater was 100% full for the 1:30 PM show. After reading a number of the reviews on here I wasn't expecting much but had heard some good buzz at work and from friends.

 

I loved it, and my wife and my son and daughter also thought it to be a great movie. The only element in retrospect that bothered me was Superman's resolution of the Zod conflict with respect to his earthly mission. But overall I think Warner / DC has a winner on their hands.

 

No complaints from me and I only hope they follow up with movies of equal caliber and light a fire under this franchise!

 

(thumbs u

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]Everyone has differing perspectives on this film, but for the most part Man Of Steel seems to be an either love it or hate it proposition. I've been straddling the fence, because I don't believe in hating any film which has fan support and promises better future productions, but at a minimum, I can't find justification for liking this movie.

 

I could go through a litany of reasons why I'm convinced that this is a terrible film, but I sincerely doubt that my POV is going to change anyone's mind.

 

That said, there is little doubt that this movie will make money and open the door to other DC franchises. I suppose that's a fair argument for supporting MoS, dependent upon what we get in return for faithful filmgoer's contributions toward making the rebooted Superman franchise a hit.

 

But I have to wonder, if the Warner's cartel re-invests their super profits in similar projects after hooking an overly receptive audience on a mediocre film should we as conscientious geeks in the fan community feel some responsibility at failing to criticize the negative side of the product? Should we just ignore the bad and feel vindicated by the promises of future good?

 

If folks want a more detailed explanation of my rationale on this film, feel free to PM me. I'll gladly respond as time allows, but I make no promises. I apologize if it seems like I'm raining on everyone's parade, but I haven't found much common ground for appreciation of this movie. Trust me, all of the criticisms I've leveled at this film aren't personal. Perhaps my taste in superhero films differs from others, that doesn't mean I think everyone else has bad taste. Richard said I'm over-thinking this movie. He's right, but I think this film requires a more critical eye because it's manipulative and communicates mixed messages about heroism and human compassion to the audience.

 

Allow me this one observation by way of a comparison with another popular superhero flick for those open to considering MoS from a broader perspective.

 

Example #1:

 

In Captain America: The First Avenger, the frail Steve Rogers is tossed a boot-camp challenge in the form of a loose hand-grenade. The choice he had to make tested his instinct for survival when conflicted by his compassion for fellow soldiers and required snap-judgment. Without a second thought the young man threw himself on the grenade to save the lives of his comrades, men who'd demonstrated little or no respect for him up to that point. Of course the hand-grenade was a dud used in training, but he didn't know that.

 

That's true heroism, in my book.

 

In that one brief moment, everyone knew what CAPTAIN AMERICA was all about.

 

Example #2:

 

Clark Kent, also on the cusp of manhood, in order to protect his secret identity resisted the impulse to save his own step-father, not to mention taking his good time arriving at that decision. Logically, one must assume that when the tornado hit the overpass (a scene undoubtably left on the cutting room floor) the folks he'd blindly led to unsafe refuge conveniently died a horrible death in order to maintain the illusion of his secret identity. After all, they're only collateral damage, just like the multitude of unseen folks in collapsing Metropolis office buildings (again, all the gruesome stuff happening off screen).

 

Truth, Justice and the American way? Not so much.

 

SUPERMAN, the Man Of Steel! ...Really? [/font]

 

 

[font:Times New Roman]So, who's the real hero here? You be the judge.[/font]

[Aman619]

oh please already.

[Aman619]

they are different movies. we get it, you hated it. cool! But comparing scenes from one pic to another isnt going to change any minds, or prove anything other than the writers all finally chose to not write a super heroic scene like they did for a powerless Cap. How about when Steve Rogers saves a busload of kids? or an oil rig? oh year wrong film. and its an unfair comparison because Supes has superpowers and wouldnt have been in any danger like Rogers was.. but whatever.