Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Agent Richard07, Jun 11, 2013.
As much as I love the movie... twice was enough for me.
I've seen it twice but I'll wait to see it again at home.
Just got out and I must say it was better than my first viewing. I still give it an A but I found the experience thoroughly enjoyable. I'm tired now so I'll elaborate more in the morning
Honestly, this needed a lighter color palette. I think the film looks really good, but Superman needs to look more like something akin to the Avengers.3
On the other-hand, perhaps the palette fits this more realistic take on Supes.
Just turn the saturation up on your tele
I don't know where you were watching it but I wasn't watching it at home.
I'm sure it's something they experimented with, but they probably decided anything brighter and more colorful would have risked making the movie look too comic booky.
Which I can definitely see. I don't think the documentary-style approach would have worked quite as well with the brighter colors of an Avengers or Spider-Man 2.
No, what you said was that most aircraft would disagree with the idea that momentum must be conserved (because what I said was nothing more than that). That's false; it must be.
Also, I was talking about Superman changing his trajectory, which, if it were to occur under real world physics, would mean that a compensating force must be applied to another body. For example, say he's floating stationary right next to Lois Lane one second, and then the next second, he's flying away at 500 miles per hour. If the compensating momentum were imparted to Lois, she'd be dead.
Now, am I saying that has to occur? No, I explicitly said that that level of realism is not necessary. I simply said, it would plausible if it did kill her.
Edit: And I also said that the momentum could be imparted to a massive and virtually stationary body, such as the Earth itself. Of course, this need not occur, either.
I quite liked the movie. There were several instances of dodgy plotting and story conveniences to be sure, but I thought the overall narrative was pretty tight and made a very effective use of flashbacks. This is a welcome change after the bloated Avengers movie. Zod was far more interesting here than the Terrence Stamp version. Kidder's Lois Lane, while never effectively used in the Donner/Lester Superman movies, remains a bit more satisfying to me than what Amy Adams gave us.
I never bought into Margot Kidder's ditzy version of Lois Lane. Amy Adams was for more interesting and appealing.
I honestly think she is the best Lois we have ever gotten on screen. I'm a fan.
My favourite Lois Lanes: Phyllis Coates, Dana Delaney, Erica Durance and now Amy Adams.
I saw this again this morning and really enjoyed it as much as the first time...maybe even more. Henry Cavill, Amy Adams and Michael Shannon were all great and are my favorite onscreen versions of these characters. Kevin Costner gave his best performance in years.
I eagerly await the blu-ray.
I've been waiting for a long time for a good Superman movie and I finally got it with Man of Steel, I loved it. Superman Returns might be the worst comic book movie I've ever seen, it was awful.
You must not have seen Catwoman, Batman & Robin, Superman III or IV, The Punisher '89, Wolverine, Man-Thing, Ghost Rider 1 and 2, or Hulk.
To name just a few.
Two words from your original post that I quoted. "during flight"
Then in your followup post you introduced lift, as seen above.
A change in trajectory can be achieved through flight without using "outside forces"as my example above demonstrates. Now instead of trajectory, maybe you meant to say velocity?
True. I stand corrected. SR still sucked though the story outline of its sequel was pretty good.
Everything I said was correct. Trajectory means in the sense of a curved path under the effect of forces including friction due to air resistance, and gravity. I mentioned lift only because you mentioned airplanes, as if they were somehow special; they're not. The thing that distinguishes airplanes from other vehicle is their wings, but the way that wings generate lift still involves conservation of momentum.
Having watched MoS a second time I think a lot of what is in the movie works as is.
The first time I thought their was way too much action but the second time I felt it all fit. Zak Snyder is one to push the limits of visual effects in all his movies. I think the first time it was all too much "In your face" action. Going in a second time and knowing what to expect made it easier to digest.
Now another complaint I've heard is that the fight scenes were too long. I chock that up to Snyder, Goyer and Nolan trying to be as faithful to the abilities of their characters as they can be without bringing in escape clauses (kryptonite or red sun rays)to make them shorter.
Kryptonians receive amazing strength, speed, stamina, endurance and a list of other powers under a yellow suns radiation. The fight between Superman and Faora and the nameless Kryptonian (we can call him Non or Quex-Ul for our purposes) in Smallville reflected that they are all equals in terms of power. Faora was easily the best fighter we saw in the movie, but since Supes has the same levels of strength and invulnerability as she does the fights seem to last forever. Add to the fact that it's a bright sunny day in Smallville, sun is refilling the Kryptonian energy reservoirs. They could literally fight all day, unless someone delivered a killing blow like Supes did to Zod. Also remember we are not talking about humans, but aliens with out of this world powers. We should expect a their display of abilities to be larger than life.
I'm a big Superman myself so I can explain some of the details as to how his powers work. Notably his flight power. Superman doesn't fly. He defies gravity. This is in the first superman movie, several comics and in Man Of Steel. Krypton was a super gravity planet. Comparable to Jupiter I think, I can't remember the exact force of gravity. Do to the photo-nucleic effect the yellow sun has on Kryptonian physiology. Members of that race are able to defy gravity and through force of will propel themselves through it. Force of will are the exact words used in the comics. Sorry I can't explain them any clearer. However this explains how debris seem to levitate with Superman before he takes off into the air. This force of will/defy gravity flight is also used to explain how Superman can lift extremely heavy objects. When he lifts something the force of the planets gravity loses it's pull on the object. Essentially Superman is only lifting mass but not weight of objects.
Strength wise, Superman and other Kryptonians are in the megaton range. Marvel's heavy hitters like the Hulk and Thor are good measures of strength to compare to Superman.
Speed wise. Is never really explain in the comics but I think it has to do with defying Earth's gravity principle that his flight power works on.
Endunrance/Invulnerability: Combination of Kryptonians having a thicker molecular density compared to humans since they come from a super gravity planet, and the sun's radiation energizing their cells. This invulnerability does not work against any and all things but their is a tolerance threshold Krytponians can endure. Again fighting someone at a comparable strength level Superman vs Faora, or Zod or Thor or inital Hulk, they probably won't feel how hard they are being hit for some time. Bring in a heavier hitter like a pissed off Hulk, Darkseid, Gladiator or Doomsday that's a whole different story.
Magic is also something that doesn't mix with Kryptonian physiology. Magic spells, characters, and weapons all render kryptonian invulnerability useless. A good example would be Superman vs Thor. Physically they are roughly equal. However Thor's physical strength is from magical background. It can hurt Supes, as can blows from beings like Hercules, Atlas and Captain Marvel. Thor also wields the enchanted hammer Mjölnir a blow from this would cause serious damage and pain to any kryptonian. The lightning from Mjölnir being also magical would cause damage and pain. Other magical weapons like Excalibur, those used by Wonder Woman and other Amazons, The Master Sword, wands and spells from Harry Potter and anything else from magical genre make Kyrptonian invulnerability not count for squat.
Then vs Now:
A criticism I've seen a lot of is how this film is that Superman seems to neglect his duty to protect the civilian population. Given the extreme circumstances present in this movie. The 2 Kryptonian devices on opposite sides of the planet terraforming the Earth. I think we can cut Supes a little if not a lot of slack. People seem to have unreal expectations for the character. This is not the Superman of the Silver Age who literally had no limit to his powers. The modern Superman is fallible. He cannot be at all places at all times. He has limits. You look at Superman Returns and the "crisis" Superman had to deal with there. A plane falling, and a series of destructive events across Metropolis that Superman had no trouble quelling with the variety of powers he possess. Nothing was a challenge for him. If there is no challenge where is the investment?
I know it's not the whimsical Superman movies we saw in Superman 1978 and Superman II 1980, but we need to accept that those movies came out 30 years ago. The world, movies, and the character have changed since then. Superman Returns gave the public a whimsical movie very reminiscent of the classic Superman films and it is seen as a failure. It didn't even inspire a sequel as far back as 2008 with the director and producers (the same directors and producers of X-Men and X2) all abandoning the any potential sequel. Man of Steel in 2 weeks has already made more money domestically and worldwide that Returns did. From Boxofficemojo, SR was alledgedly in theaters for 19 weeks and ended with a domestic haul of just over $200 million. MoS is not perfect but it's a step in the right direction.
Lastly Superman vs The Avengers and property damage bills
I can't believe this is actually a thing. The damage to New York was caused by alien invaders of flying scooters with laser beams and giant flying alien slugs. The damage to Metropolis was caused by a terraforming machine that was increasing the gravity of the planet. The Kryptonian world engine isn't nearly as fast or neat as TWOK's geneis torpedo as a terraforming device but it did facilitate the need for destruction in the context of the film. Part of having a fallible Superman is he can't be all places at once. I equate it to ask Thor to defend New York all by himself from the Chitauri. As far as the death toll goes. The Avengers glossed over this part as well. MoS's destruction is reminiscent of what we see in Transformers 3 when Chicago got decimated. I think the destruction in MoS is appropriate for a credible alien invasion movie. Snyder doesn't pull any punches in delivering this in your faces action film. With the sequel he may dial the action back a bit (unless Brainiac is the villain) but as a reboot i think it succeeds.
Lastly Superman killing I don't have a problem with it. Zod was an unrepentant bad guy who had already caused the death of thousands, intended to kill billions and threatened to do so again after Superman had thwarted his plans. I really see it as death by cop. Zod was beaten and forced Superman to execute him. Superman has killed Zod before in the comics. Only it was after Zod had succeeded in murdering Earth's populace of 5 billion (this was in 1988) and was gloating he would do so again on a parallel Earth.
Separate names with a comma.