• 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!

MAN OF STEEL - Grading & Discussion

Grade the movie...


  • Total voters
    265
Well not every film has a commentary track. Some dirctors don't like them. But that still leaves the cast and other production members. But the studio has to spend the money on it.
 
The box office has definitely slowed to a crawl. It's been inching towards $290 for a while now, but just can't seem to get there.

Still though, $649 million worldwide is pretty good for a reboot that most everyone supposedly hates.

Er, the poll results on this very thread would indicate that the movie is not exactly hated . . . .
 
^ I watched all the Christopher Reeve movies over the weekend and something about his take on the character doesn't sit well with me. Too handsome, too much of a boy scout and too much of an ideal in general. My favorites right now are Dean Cain and Henry Cavill. Their versions of Superman are more humanized and real.

I don't know. I think for the movies, Reeve's Superman works perfectly. He's basically a god on earth, and his portrayal is exactly what I would hope a god would be like.

I think that's one of the reasons why the character is so endearing to everyone. He is basically the personification of an awesome deity, a deity who cares deeply about every human being and uses his powers to help as much as he can.

I thought Dean Cain was excellent as Clark Kent. I loved the whole take on it that Clark was the true person and "Superman" was the identity taken. I think they hit the jackpot with chemistry between the quirky but loveable Lois and the stoic but down to earth good guy Clark.

I always felt his Superman was very uncomfortable. Almost like he felt silly wearing that costume. I hated that arm crossing thing he used to do also.

Henry Cavill was just another actor attempting to capture the look of Chris Reeve IMO. I thought he did fine though, and some scenes were memorable (like the Oil Rig scene, the movie needed more moments like that).

Once the action kicked in, you no longer saw him, but rather just blurs on-screen for the next 30 mins.

I was expecting MoS to be the Superman equivalent to Batman Begins (judging by the trailers it seems to be going in that direction). However, the trailers pretty much showed us all the character scenes in the movie.

Not sure why directors think that adding mind numbing CGI for 30+ is making a movie "better" nowadays.

I hated Watchmen, so I guess I'm not surprised, but I had hopes.
 
Reeve was perfect as the pure and idealized Christ figure that the first movie called for, but I frankly find Cavill's much more human and relatable Superman to be a lot more interesting and compelling.
 
Reeve was perfect as the pure and idealized Christ figure that the first movie called for, but I frankly find Cavill's much more human and relatable Superman to be a lot more interesting and compelling.

When did this whole "I can't relate to the character, so I don't like him" thing become popular?

Do people really relate to (checks the highest grossing movies list) blue avatars, street-rats who die on sinking ships and rich, snarky men in iron suits that hang out with gods and green monsters?

The whole point of Superman isn't relating to him. It's seeing something to strive for that you WISH you could be. It's why we put on capes as kids and ran around pretending to fly. And maybe it's something we shouldn't have outgrown.
 
Henry Cavill was just another actor attempting to capture the look of Chris Reeve IMO.

Are you sure you don't mean Brandon Routh? Bryan Singer admitted the reason he cast Routh was because he resembled Chris Reeves. If you compare Reeves and Routh you can see the resemblance. Cavil not so much. Cavil is his own Superman.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top