Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!
It's not either-or. Narrative mechanics do matter very much, even if they're not the only things that matter. Every aspect of a story matters. And you can love some parts of a story while criticizing others at the same time. The one does not negate or prohibit the other.
My point is that some fans tend to be obsessive pedants, and to prioritize so-called "plot holes" (no matter how nitpicky, obscure, or unimportant) over all other considerations. I have seen films that were triumphs of character, emotion, theme, performance, you name it, dogpiled by fans because of a fixation on pointless minutiae.
Is a tight script nice? Sure. But a movie like Superman '78 makes my heart leap and my spirit sing, and "plot holes" (not that I believe the movie actually has any of any significance) count for little in the face of that.
My point is that some fans tend to be obsessive pedants, and to prioritize so-called "plot holes" (no matter how nitpicky, obscure, or unimportant) over all other considerations.
Of course, but my point is that it's just as wrong to go to the other extreme and treat plot logic and coherence as completely unimportant. The healthy response to one extreme is not the opposite extreme, it's a reasonable middle ground.
Is a tight script nice? Sure. But a movie like Superman '78 makes my heart leap and my spirit sing, and "plot holes" (not that I believe the movie actually has any of any significance) count for little in the face of that.
My point is that some fans tend to be obsessive pedants, and to prioritize so-called "plot holes" (no matter how nitpicky, obscure, or unimportant) over all other considerations. I have seen films that were triumphs of character, emotion, theme, performance, you name it, dogpiled by fans because of a fixation on pointless minutiae.
What is the point of this comment? I had noted that I had spotted some plot holes in the 1978 Superman movie and therefore . . . I'm a possessive pedant? Nearly every movie or television production I have seen had flaws or some kind of plot hole. My problem with "Superman: The Movie" is that as I got older, I began to notice some questionable aspects of the film that made me think less of it than I used to. I didn't realize that you considered this opinion a threat.
What is the point of this comment? I had noted that I had spotted some plot holes in the 1978 Superman movie and therefore . . . I'm a possessive pedant?
My point is that some fans tend to be obsessive pedants, and to prioritize so-called "plot holes" (no matter how nitpicky, obscure, or unimportant) over all other considerations. I have seen films that were triumphs of character, emotion, theme, performance, you name it, dogpiled by fans because of a fixation on pointless minutiae.
What is the point of this comment? I had noted that I had spotted some plot holes in the 1978 Superman movie and therefore . . . I'm a possessive pedant? Nearly every movie or television production I have seen had flaws or some kind of plot hole. My problem with "Superman: The Movie" is that as I got older, I began to notice some questionable aspects of the film that made me think less of it than I used to. I didn't realize that you considered this opinion a threat.
Apologies, Dee1891. My comment wasn't directed at you personally; I was just riffing on the broader topic of fannish nitpicking after Christopher challenged my original response to you. But I can see how you would have taken it that way, and that wasn't my intent.
Apologies, Dee1891. My comment wasn't directed at you personally; I was just riffing on the broader topic of fannish nitpicking after Christopher challenged my original response to you. But I can see how you would have taken it that way, and that wasn't my intent.
There's the Dark Flash (who was an anti-hero version of Wally West from another universe) and then there's the Black Flash who's basically the Speedster version of the Grim Reaper.
I think the Batman '66 DLC for either the second or third LEGO Batman game did include the sound effects, and even gave you the option to turn them on for the whole game.
I really like Zimmer's work (I listen to his Prague concert at least every few months) and the start of the Man of Steel theme really makes me go "Yes... this is what I want" - the quiet parts in particular. But as a full piece... it doesn't really gel for me as Superman. Just can't top Williams for me.
As its own thing though, I really like it.
Wonder Woman by contrast hooked me right in. One of the few moments I liked about Batman v Superman was that cello when she showed up.
The Zimmer theme sounds more like the music you hearwhen you see the credits roll...kind of background music that is just there... and there'sno hook that someone could hum or sing acapella or really have a passion to do a cover for.
But like @Thestral said, the Wonder Woman theme gets you excited right away (it sure did with the theater crowd when it played when Wonder Woman first appeared in B v. S). And speaking of that...it would be a crying shame if that theme disappeared in the DCOU and afterwards. THIS would be a theme that would be worth carrying over in future versions.
No matter what you think of the 1978 movie, the theme song is truly a classic, and that in itself, has become a part of the mythos, as much a red pentagon or a curvy s, or a red cape.
Oh and one other tangent.... theclip that was shown in @Samurai8472 's post had Clark first trying to fly.
In and of itself, as part of the origin, is pretty cool. But it feels like Zod arrives just a few days after this. So Clark has mastered flying so quickly that he can defeat similarly powered Kryptonians? It's that bad directing that continually self-sabotaged Man of Steel. With the Donner films, we knew Superman had some prior experience, and could use that in his fighting. Captain America had a montage, so we could easily embrace him as a leader of heroes.
I am with @Anwar and totally opposite @The Realist on this. Even as a 5 year old, Luthor was simply annoying and not at all what Luthor "ought" to be. (And yeah, I was definitely influenced by Challeneg of the Superfriends, and his origin as show there).
I know many might say that Jesse Eisenberg was perhaps the only miscast character in the Snyderverse (even people who say they "hate " Snyder should agree that most casting was good), but his Luthor, especially in light of President T@rump, at least feels a bit more realisitic, certainly more than Hackman's Luthor, who has to constantly remind us that he is the world's greatest criminal mastermind. At least Eisenberg showed a bit of scientific (an criminal) genius there.
Great...we are gonna get soooooo many comparisons now to Multiverse of Madness and No Way Home. I hope they can at least fit in Grant Gustin, to show us the reflection of his encoutner in Crisis. And with that, will there at least be a mention of Victor???
