Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by JoeZhang, Jul 20, 2013.
Or he'd say, "I'm going to need a bigger boat."
I remember thinking why not just change the actors but keep the same continuity? The Lizard had already been established as an upcoming villain in the Raimi series anyway.
No, "I'm going to need a bigger chopper."
^yeah, I thought it would be a reboot lite, like Batman Forever. Having said that, I enjoyed TAS and liked the different approaches this series is taking from the Raimiverse, not least of all the arc with Peter's parents and their Oscorp connection.
What is odd is that apparently Sony didn't think that Dylan Baker was a big enough actor to play a villain and they weren't sure about the Lizard as the big bad. Yet we ended up with Rhys Ifans, who is hardly a bigger name, as, er, The Lizard!
Yeah, that's what I've always kind of assumed. Judging from the final product, it was obvious he didn't have much to do with it at all.
That's a longer way of saying exactly what I said: he's dead. Yeah, he can be brought back at some point if a writer decides to bring him back (a writer can just as easily bring Zod from MoS back through some explanation about the effects of the yellow sun healing even a broken neck over time... or cloning... or some other contrivance), but for the purposes of the story we're watching, the villain is dead now.
Sure, but not too many years, otherwise it'll be hard for the sequel to deal with the aftermath.
I didn't see it as a flaw or a failure at all. I didn't need to see people coping with the aftermath, because we already saw that represented by Perry White and co. struggling to survive and help each other. I didn't need to see first responders and newscasts and reconstruction, or whatever else dealing with the aftermath would entail. We already know what all that looks like. 9-11 wasn't that long ago.
Just to be more clear, I'm referring to the Insurgency version from the comic book series, not from the game. In the game, it looks too bulky to me. The comic book version is probably the best batsuit i've ever seen.
But it would have been nice to see a couple minutes of Superman helping to rebuild the city. A short montage of him pulling survivors from the rubble, reuniting families, and cleaning the damage or lending a hand to reconstruction would have gone a long way to showing us the Superman we know--the one who spends most of his time helping people rather than just fighting crime.
^Now I'm picturing a post-credits scene of Superman pushing a broom, a la Carol Burnett....
I have no problem assuming that Superman did help out, once he finally collected himself after the killing of Zod. And we saw plenty of him helping people out earlier in the movie, so I don't think we really needed further proof of that.
I think the bigger issue is just with the level of destruction itself. It didn't bother me nearly as much as it did others, but it does raise some questions. And it make the shift in tone later on feel more than a little jarring.
I was thinking that a clean up scene would have established him more of a hero in the eyes of the citizens in the movie. As for the destruction, I think that I was appropriately jarred because that was the intention. In the context of the movie it worked because this would have been the level of destruction. We were meant to be horrified by it.
True, but I was referring more to the sudden shift in tone that came with the lighthearted satellite and Daily Planet scenes.
I was actually glad NOT to see that. Before the last scene, I was assuming I was going to see a retread of the end of Superman II (where Superman symbolically started rebuilding the White House with the flag). I was thinking it would take me out of the movie as much as Spock screaming "KHAAAAN!" took me out of Into Darkness. I was relieved when it didn't happen.
The one thing I do wish they'd done differently was have Superman try to rescue a few more civilians in the midst of the battle. But I forgive that because his decision to end Zod when he did was ALL about saving that one family (not to mention the entire human race).
LOL--I am sure a quick scene, or even a shot of a newspaper headline, could have been done in the tone of the film without being to cliche.
Of course, the director forgot that this family was even there in all subsequent shots of that bus terminal. The family wasn't important. We don't even see a reaction or a thank you from them. The family was a plot contrivance.
Watching the original Superman 2, the camera is on the civilians nearly half the time, and on Superman's attempts to save them from the battle remnants.
To be honest I would prefer to see an ensemble Justice League movie than just Batman and Superman. I'm not saying the movie will be bad but that would have excited me more. What I liked about Avengers wasn't just when my favorite heroes were on the screens but seeing the lot of them interact and advance in the plot.
Because the focus at the end was on Superman's grief, as it should have been. It was a hugely important moment, and to cut away from that to the family would have just been weird and distracting.
Wah, wah. Poor Superman, he had to kill a guy who was participating in the slaughter of thousands and thousands in Metropolis... (Superman being the OTHER participant) My heart bleeds.
They hadn't bothered with any sort of emotional moment from Supes in the entire movie, why did they start then?
Bah. Horrible movie.
That's coming too.
I'm glad to see Superman and Batman team up (or face off) first. First of all, unlike Marvel, which has several properties that define them (FF, Spiderman, X-Men, Iron Man) the first things people think of when they think of DC are Superman and Batman. They're the big two, and the two of them encountering each other deserves an entire film. Also, I would argue that the two of them coming together (because they'll face something that neither of them can handle on his own) is probably what's going to inspire them to create the League, so it has to happen first. They're the foundation of the JL.
As an aside: they'd been teaming up in the comics since 1941, long before the Justice League was ever formed (they were only honorary members of the Justice Society, since DC policy didn't allow them to be real members until later on... Justice Society was meant as a vehicle for characters who didn't star in their own books).
My comment was more about Filmmaking 101. If something is in a scene, it shouldn't disappear when it goes to a wide shot and all subsequent shots.
Also, the family was important enough for Superman to break someone's neck to save them, but not important enough that we don't see them ever again?
Agreed. As much as I'd love to finally see Flash or WW on the big screen, Batman and Superman finally meeting is just too huge an event to be relegated to a few minutes (or a minor subplot) in a Justice League movie.
Separate names with a comma.