Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Agent Richard07, Jun 11, 2013.
I've only listened to the first 5 parts, but it's basically what Shazam said. Smith likes it but isn't above having some minor quibbles (fight scene too long) or cracking a few jokes about it. And the guy's he's chatting with felt that it lacked joy, color and that comic book feel he expects from superhero movies.
Ehh, he retires all the time. It's like Ross getting divorced. I had a teacher in college who was retired. Daniel Day-Lewis used to be retired.
And if you are a RedLetterMedia Star Wars review keep it under 0 minutes.
Have I landed on an alternate Earth where people have actually seen those dreadful Plinkett nerdrage butthurt videos for what they really were?
They're pretty lame, yeah.
I'm a huge fan of Superman on film. I even have my own "fan explanation" for the spinning around the globe thing in the first film. Film is such a literal medium, and, as a result, people think that he's spinning around the world in one direction so fast that he's causing the world to spin the other direction. Because it's on film, people think it's a literal physical process. I don't. My POV: There are hints throughout the original Donner film that the Kryptonians have some kind of access to time itself, as if it's part of their senses and faculties, and they can manipulate it. Which is why Jor-El can interact with Kal-El even thousands of years after his death. Which is why Kal-El can spend twelve years in the Fortress but actually was in there for far longer, learning so much more and in essence traveling the galaxy with his father. When Jor-El tells him not to interfere with human history, he was being literal, and whereas he could dismiss the flying around and the parlor tricks, he doesn't want Clark to interfere with the timeline. So the "spinning around the globe" thing isn't literal, but it was analogous to what he must do (notice his rage) in order to actually move back in time just a few minutes, in defiance of Jor-El's orders.
That's my fan theory, like it or not. Needless to say, I'm a fan. Even if Donner himself would tell me different (he has, on commentaries, etc) I still like it. Superman Returns was a film I was psyched for. I wonder why they waited so long to bring the character back to not have him do anything.
Man of Steel is like the Bill Clinton of movies, it tries to please everyone. They were overcompensating from Returns. To be fair, there are a few new twists to the mythos that I could appreciate. I might not like these twists compared with a the straightforward, classic Superman story, but I can understand their appeal: These include:
- Mild Mannered reporter coming at the end.
- Clark and Lois meeting as they did, and she knows who he is.
- getting his powers all at once, and he needs all that time to control his senses.
these are pretty good. And some of the scenes worked. But this film was Transformers with Supermen. And while I'd argue that Transformers had some great characters (it definitely did) it was always about giant robots causing destruction as they fight their war here. That's what it was about. And how glorious in the first TF film to see buildings being wrecked as robots change from helicopters and planes to robots and back. It hadn't been done in live action. But the ending of Man of Steel was indistinguishable form TF. It is glorious seeing two superhuman guys go at it. It is nice to see superman punch someone. But The giant robots had more presence than two little people. So this was never as interesting.
The story jumped so much, discarding the epic structure of the Donner films, but in doing so, Snyder failed to assert a tone of his own.. it never felt like the different parts of the film were of a piece. How disappointing.
And the scenes involving the military here scenes were so anemic that it reminded how good Michael Bay was at directing scenes involving the military.. he would often instruct them to do what they would do in a given hypothetical situation but he'd give it an energy that's lacking here. Particularly the performances of the various soldiers all seem to lack energy. There was more meaningful energy onscreen during the Skorponok attack in TF1 than for the entirety of MoS.
So at least half a billion, probably more.
What, the number of people killed by Superman over the course of the movie?! :BOOM!:
Which were you favourites, the horrifically racist ones or the ones endorsing casual sexism?
I always imagined an alternate version of that scene where Superman interrupts her monologue by responding, "I'm still working on that power, actually."
C+ or B-
As a belated father's day event (he was sick last week), I took my 73 year old father who has been a Superman fan since the 1940s to see it today.
He wasn't impressed.
I liked it a better than he did but I was disappointed.
The cast was very good, especially Costner, Crowe and Cavill.
The fight scene in Smallville had some good moments. Same with the prologue on Krypton.
But it was largely an unrelentingly grim and violent film that, except for the scene where Superman first learned to fly, was almost completely without joy or wonder. And a Superman movie, unlike Batman, should have a lot of joy and wonder.
Donner and Reeve understood this.
Snyder and Nolan didn't.
I completely agree with you but I reconcile such qualms by reminding myself that these are takes on characters. There have been plenty of 'grim' Superman tales (the guy died) and this movie is just another in a long line of interpretations and if we have to through this one to get to that one mythical perfect Superman movie I'm all for it.
The fact that I enjoyed this one as much as I did is an added bonus.
LOSER OF THE WEEK: Man of Steel. Though it's hard to call a movie a loser when it earned an estimated $41.2 million this weekend. Still, that represents a slide of 65 percent from last weekend's first-place debut. The movie has earned $210.0 million in North America and $283.3 million worldwide in two weeks, again, not really loser territory except by the movie's own lofty standards. Given its estimated $225 million budget, the movie will have to gross about $500 million worldwide to recoup its costs. That'll be an uphill climb, especially with The Lone Ranger opening in two weeks
Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/...-in-a-record-june-week-20130623#ixzz2X4zWtauz
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook
After the first 10 minutes of the second act, Joy and Wonder left Donner and Reeve at the alter.
This "it was joyless" complaint from the folks who didn't like the movie is trivial and inaccurate. There's no content there, other than as a way of elevating "I didn't like it."
What a load of B/S, anyone who starts with "Though it's hard to call a movie a loser" should shut up at that point. Man of Steel will break into that $300 million club domestically and be set for a $600-700 million worldwide gross.
As for The Long Ranger, that will flop.
I still do not understand this criticism at all.
For me there was plenty of joy and wonder in the amazing design of Krypton, in the dramatic rescues of the refinery workers and schoolkids, in the first reveal of Superman to us and to the military, in the arrival of the huge Kryptonian ships, in the exciting rescue of Lois from the escape pod, in Superman overcoming the energy beam and flying into the heart of the World Engine, and in much of the visuals and choreography of the epic battles.
As a Superman and superhero fan, I thought this movie was just chalk-full of wondrous and amazing moments (far more than in IM3, Cap, or Thor in fact), and sat there in awe pretty much all the way through. How anyone could be completely unimpressed or find the whole thing nothing but a dreary, tedious exercise, I'll never understand.
Separate names with a comma.