Superman (casting, rumors, pix till release)

[Nerys Myk]

Drift happens, especially when there's a gap in new information.

When ever you say you like X and hate Y somone will come back with the opposite view and question your opinion, taste and sanity.

Nolan is involved in this film, discussing his and Snyder's past work is a valid tack.

If you really think the thread is off track and the posters aren't following the rules hit the notify mod button.

No one like a mini-mod.

 

[Nagisa Furukawa]

I don't think, at this point, it's actually breaking any forum rules or is something the mods need to enforce.

It's just, personally, frustrating to see 3-4 pages on non-MoS topics (albeit connected by one of the producers on this happening to be the director on something else). I'll stay out of it then; continue.

 

[Admiral_Young]

This thread has been all over the place since it was first created so it's par for the course

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I'm perfectly fine with them doing an origin, I just don't want it to take up half the friggin movie again (or, as with Batman Begins, 3/4 of the movie).

I would normally agree. However, it seems to be thematically important. As long as it's relevant to the plot, I can't complain.

 

[kirk55555]

Batman Forever and batman and Robin (both of which were better than TDK

"And I thought my jokes were bad."

Yeah, lots of credibility lost there if he thinks Batman Forever and Batman and Robin were better. Schuemaker is the guy that really screwed up the franchise, not Nolan.

I know people are getting annoyed by this conversation, but I figured I neded to answer this. Batman Forever and Batman & Robin are horrible movies, but I can watch them from time to time. I guess, for me, they have a so bad its entertaining feel. They suck, but they can keep my attention, and make me chuckle at how bad they are. So, in that respect, they are better than TDK or Rises to me. Those movies are slow, long, boring, and I obviously hate them. I wouldn't rewatch them (well, ok, I've probably seen TDK twice since it came out, but 2 times in 4 years, and probably never again, isn't much). So, yeah, to me they are much better than TDK or Rises, but that doesn't make them good movies by a long shot.

 

[Gojira]

"And I thought my jokes were bad."

Yeah, lots of credibility lost there if he thinks Batman Forever and Batman and Robin were better. Schuemaker is the guy that really screwed up the franchise, not Nolan.

I know people are getting annoyed by this conversation, but I figured I neded to answer this. Batman Forever and Batman & Robin are horrible movies, but I can watch them from time to time. I guess, for me, they have a so bad its entertaining feel. They suck, but they can keep my attention, and make me chuckle at how bad they are. So, in that respect, they are better than TDK or Rises to me. Those movies are slow, long, boring, and I obviously hate them. I wouldn't rewatch them (well, ok, I've probably seen TDK twice since it came out, but 2 times in 4 years, and probably never again, isn't much). So, yeah, to me they are much better than TDK or Rises, but that doesn't make them good movies by a long shot.

I actually enjoy Batman Forever and Batman and Robin more than the Nolan movies. I grew up on Adam West as Batman so I see those films as more of an homage or modern telling of that style of Batman films.

While I may like Nolan's Batman movies more than you I do see your points. For me superhero movies need to have some fun in them and Nolan's movies, while suspenceful for me, did not have any fun in them at all.

 

[SalvorHardin]

There's a new review out with more details from some guy who supposedly attended a screening

Spoiler: mos spoilers

The story is simple, and executed better for it. You're basically presented Clark Kent as a boy/man going through changes and having an internal conflict about his identity. This character arc has a two step resolution. The first is him coming to terms with his role as a potential protector of humanity, a conflict fueled by various events in his life, which brings us the first amazing and climactic point of the movie with the birth of Superman. The second is the reality of the existence of Superman on humanity and him coming to peace with what that means for him and how he is perceived. This obviously brings us the major climax of the movie, supported by an ass whooping.

The action is great in the movie. There is fair bit of it. It feels like The Matrix. By that, I mean it's quite over the top. This is good because it's Superman. There are a lot of little touches that are shown by Henry Cavill which give more gravitas to the vulnerability of Superman. Moments where he's shaken or staggered. They're just cool moments. The action is both slow and fast which gives an effect of something superhuman occurring. In terms of action, there are about four major setpieces. Then there are a lot of little action moments in between. It really does feel like the first time Superman has been done justice in live action. There is one moment near the end where you will go, this is fucking Superman. It's basically the climactic moment. I'll have to re-watch Avengers, but I think I enjoyed the action in this movie more than any other superhero movie because it just had a lot of weight behind it.

You want Superman to succeed.

Henry Cavill is Superman to me now. I like his take on the character. I don't really care necessarily how Superman/Clark Kent is in the comics. But Henry has a really good performance and brings a new Superman for the modern era. One who is powerful, strong, and inhumane in ability, yet also relatable and earns our sympathy. Also, he looks so much more awesome with the beard. It would be amazing having a Superman with a beard. Let him be clean shaven as Clark Kent, but then when he goes all manly and turns into Superman, he grows a beard instantly too. You get used to seeing Cavill without the beard, but it's so weird. Like he was born to have that beard.

Also, damn Zod is badass. Too badass. He comes out with some next level quotes. I don't even--

The weakest aspect of this movie is the Lois Lane/Clark Kent/Superman relationship. I don't think Amy Adams turned in a bad performance, but in a movie which is quite tight and focused, this aspect was the weakest link. It kind of sticks out. The character on her own is fine, and her little crew are a very pleasant addition, but I think they could've stopped going Hollywood and left a little of the relationship development to a second movie.

Supporting cast is strong. Kevin Costner is really cool. The My-Cocaine of this movie. He's not in it very long, but maybe I like those father figure characters. Also, Morpheus being all Morpheus and being pretty cool again.

The music is very nice. At times slow and emotional, and at others sweeping and epic. The new theme is good. Different, but good. It fits the Man of Steel.

I think I chose to compare this to Batman Begins for a few reasons. It feels similar, it's also character focused, and it does a fantastic job of making you anticipate the next movie. There is a nice blend of serious character focus, and lighthearted humour in the movie. The villains for the sequel are somewhat hinted, and this is a really strong first outing. I'm definitely curious to see what happens with the sequel. They could make an amazing movie like The Dark Knight, or like Iron Man 2, turn out a pile of crap after a solid first movie. Who knows, but as it stands, there will be hyperbole when people see this move. I'm sure of it. That's because it's good, and one of the best superhero movies. More importantly, it's brought Superman from being that little pussy who is always in the shadow of the Goddamn Batman, to more of an equal standing.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/nailbiter111/news/?a=75176

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Can I get a non-spoiler summary of that?

 

[SalvorHardin]

Can I get a non-spoiler summary of that?

There weren't any really huge spoilers but since I don't know what someone else might consider a spoiler I won't go into any details:

The story is simple but well executed. It's character focused and it makes you look forward to a sequel. There is also lighthearted humor in it.
The action is great and there's quite a bit of it. It feels like the first time Superman has been done justice in live action.
Cavil is a great Superman that makes you care and want him to succeed.
Zod is badass with great lines.
The Lois/Clark/Superman relationship is the weakest part of the movie but it doesn't mean Adams gave a bad performance. She's better when alone or with the rest of her crew.
The rest of the cast is strong too.
The music is nice, sometimes slow and emotional other times epic. The main theme is different but it fits MoS.
The villains for the potential sequel are hinted.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Thanks, that's perfect.

 

[TheSeeker]

^What he said.

 

[Gojira]

The more I heard about the more excited I get and confident that it will be good!

 

[kirk55555]

Eh, I don't trust that review, mostly because I liked Iron Man 2 (it wasn't as good as IM1, but its a solid movie, although the villain sucks) and hated TDK, the opposite of the reviewer. Plus, the person states they don't care how Superman/Clark Kent has been in comics, so that probably means that this superman is just as dark and brooding as I thought Nolan would make him. This movie does sound like Nolan's style of garbage. The movie sounds like exactly what I expected. Nolan's Batman movies with a Superman skin. Comparing it to The Matrix is just weird, and comparing it to Batman Begins means that it may just be mediocre, not horrible (Batman begins being the only Nolan movie I don't hate, although it wasn't a good movie by any means, it was just extremely mediocre). There is a chance the movie may be slighty better than TDK or Rises, since there isn't much chance that Cavill could be a worse actor than Bale, but its still going to be the worst of the SM movies.

 

[Gojira]

Eh, I don't trust that review, mostly because I liked Iron Man 2 (it wasn't as good as IM1, but its a solid movie, although the villain sucks) and hated TDK, the opposite of the reviewer. Plus, the person states they don't care how Superman/Clark Kent has been in comics, so that probably means that this superman is just as dark and brooding as I thought Nolan would make him. This movie does sound like Nolan's style of garbage. The movie sounds like exactly what I expected. Nolan's Batman movies with a Superman skin. Comparing it to The Matrix is just weird, and comparing it to Batman Begins means that it may just be mediocre, not horrible (Batman begins being the only Nolan movie I don't hate, although it wasn't a good movie by any means, it was just extremely mediocre). There is a chance the movie may be slighty better than TDK or Rises, since there isn't much chance that Cavill could be a worse actor than Bale, but its still going to be the worst of the SM movies.

Regarding the higlighted section. Your mind is closed and made up. What would itt ake for you to go to the movie with a more open mind?

 

[Captaindemotion]

^I'm guessing a brain transplant.

 

[kirk55555]

Eh, I don't trust that review, mostly because I liked Iron Man 2 (it wasn't as good as IM1, but its a solid movie, although the villain sucks) and hated TDK, the opposite of the reviewer. Plus, the person states they don't care how Superman/Clark Kent has been in comics, so that probably means that this superman is just as dark and brooding as I thought Nolan would make him. This movie does sound like Nolan's style of garbage. The movie sounds like exactly what I expected. Nolan's Batman movies with a Superman skin. Comparing it to The Matrix is just weird, and comparing it to Batman Begins means that it may just be mediocre, not horrible (Batman begins being the only Nolan movie I don't hate, although it wasn't a good movie by any means, it was just extremely mediocre). There is a chance the movie may be slighty better than TDK or Rises, since there isn't much chance that Cavill could be a worse actor than Bale, but its still going to be the worst of the SM movies.

Regarding the higlighted section. Your mind is closed and made up. What would itt ake for you to go to the movie with a more open mind?

They'd have to fire Nolan, then rewrite and reshoot the movie. Just from that review, it seems to be reeking of Nolan. Since I think he's a talentless hack who made the worst superhero film I've ever seen, I am definately going to hate everything he does, and MoS looks to be his movie, regardless of the fact that he's not the director. I mean, every producer (according to wikipedia) worked with nolan on his horrible Batman movies, and the writer wrote TDK (and Rises). They literally just took everyone who worked on one of my most hated movies and put them on MoS. I can't have an open mind about this movie. Its made by people whose work I have hated in the past. The only way I could hate it more is if Abrams and the writers who wrote Transformers/Star Trek 2009 were involved. So, no I can't have a more open mind about this movie.

^I'm guessing a brain transplant.

Well, I would take a lobotomy to make Nolan's stuff seem good

 

[SalvorHardin]

But you're still going to see it a couple of times, right?

 

[kirk55555]

No, I'm not. I'll see it when the library gets it on DVD. Even if I had the money/transportation to get to the nearest theatre (about 25 miles away) I wouldn't waste my time/money on it. When TDK came out, I almost went and saw it (Since its the movie that made me hate Nolan, I was actually originally hopeful that it would be good). But, luckily it was crowded so my brother, dad and I decided it would be better to go see Tropic Thunder. it was a great decision. We saw a funny comedy, and it delayed having to see the worst Superhero movie ever for months. Of course, my dad did by it on DVD when it came out, which turned out to be a waste of money (something my brother, dad and I agree on, although they don't have the same Nolan hate I do, they just don't bother with his movies at all after TDK). I've never actually seen a movie more than once in theatres (well, except Lion King apparently, but I hadn't even turned 4 yet, and don't really remember, my Dad just talks about taking me twice), but I definately wouldn't see a Nolan movie even once. I've been fairly lucky with seeing movies, the only bad ones I've seen were 10,000 BC, Star Trek 2009 and Pink Panther. but, I haven't seen a movie in about 2 years because of money and transportation issues (missing Avengers and the Hobbit in theatres sucked) so I don't see myself seeing any movies on the big screen for the forseeable future, much less movies I know I'll hate.

 

[SalvorHardin]

No, I'm not. I'll see it when the library gets it on DVD.

So, you'll see it.
It's not important if you see it on the big screen or a free dvd. You'll still be wasting time watching a movie you hate already. And then wasting more time talking about it online most likely.

 

[kirk55555]

No, I'm not. I'll see it when the library gets it on DVD.

So, you'll see it.
It's not important if you see it on the big screen or a free dvd. You'll still be wasting time watching a movie you hate already. And then wasting more time talking about it online most likely.

Well, I saw The Dark Knight Rises on DVD, even after despising TDK. It all comes down to the fact that I have a morbid curiosity to see what new levels of suck Nolan and other people will go too. Now, I don't watch most movies I think will be bad. But, this is a superman movie. I'll watch it, on DVD for free. Its not like they put out a hundred superhero movies a year, so even bad ones with characters I know are worth glancing at. My time isn't super valuable anyway. If there is a few good fight scenes, or some especially bad acting/dialog/plot points to laugh at or mock, spending a few hours watching it will be worth it. If its unwatchable, I'll stop watching and return the DVD to the library. I'm a fan of comics and superheros, so I usually check out even the superhero movies I know I won't like. Its the same reason I'll watch ST: Into Darkness on dVD. I actually hate Abrams a bit more than Nolan (although they're pretty close when it comes to being horrible), but since there is literally no Trek besides the books, I'll watch what they put out, but not support it monetarily. Same goes with superhero movies. I know I'll like most of the Marvel stuff, and they make a good amount. WB doesn't do many superhero movies, so I'll atleast check out what they do put out, even if I know it will be bad.