Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoilers

[Belz...]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

1) Kryptonians explored space for 100,000 years; yet when faced with the destruction of their world (and in this version no one disagrees with Jor El's assessment); can't/won't evacuate even though they are aware of plenty of habitable worlds in range?

They A) don't have ships anymore and B) they're not convinced about Jor-El's theory. Only Zod seems to agree.

2) Jor El owns/rides a 'flying dragon' (shades of 'Dragon Riders of Pern, or 'Avatar'.)

That's a WTF plot moment for you ? That they have animals on Krypton ?

3) All Kryptonians are cloned (ala 'The Matrix'); and genetically designed to be the best at their assigned job/role/function. (This is a first for any version of the Superman mythos.)

They're not cloned. They are grown. And I don't see how that's a WTF since it's very clear.

4) The 'sacred Codex' (which is somehow the basis of all cloned Kryptonians); is a black, decaying and desiccated partial skull suspended in a laser beam.

I'm not sure you're clear about what a "WTF moment" is.

5) When Clarks is talking to Johnathan Kent about the school bus incident, and Clark asks "Should I have let them die?" and Johnathan answers, "Yes, maybe..."

You might have missed it, but there's a discussion right after that line.

6) Johnathan dies because he doesn't want Clark going back out to save the family dog - and somehow risk exposing his powers to witnesses

Yes, and that makes perfect sense in context. Although I agree that the tornado should have had a visible effect even at a greater distance, it works for the movie that it didn't.

7) Kal El (aka Superman), who has spent his life avoiding fights, and was not trained to fight by anyone (least of all Johnathan Kent) can, somehow, defeat three kryptonian soldiers, and in the end General Zod himself (after Zod had acclimated to the Earth's atmosphere and his newfound abilities, including flight which he did in the final combat sequence) -- ALL of whom were genetically engineered as well as trained their entire lives to be nothing but combat soldiers...

He doesn't defeat them, so this one is null and void.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

I'm not sure you're clear about what a "WTF moment" is.

Doesn't seem to be, no.

 

[shatastrophic]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

Returns wasn't too bad. It was too much of a homage to I and II to be worth a sequel, but I liked it, and Spacey as Luthor.

Exactly. The movie has it virtues (the airplane scene is terrific), but, in the end, it probably coasted too heavily on nostalgia for the Donner film instead of going its own way.

Everyone forgets why Singer now has a lifetime pass as a director where the movie houses are concerned. Superman Returns at one point had every actor under the sun and every director attached to it. They all had clauses in their contracts that stated payment for any submissions or screen tests. There was a rumor Nic Cage walked away with a couple of million and did nothing but read the script. The movie was already 300 million in the hole before Singer attacked pre production. Based on this I thought the end product was a great example of how a director can come thru for both audiences and movie houses. Yeah it could've been better but Singer did the best he could with what he had.

I just heard this stuff, I don't have anything to back it up

 

[Belz...]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

300 million ? That's not what BoxOfficeMojo lists, anyway.

 

[shatastrophic]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

300 million ? That's not what BoxOfficeMojo lists, anyway.

Like I said, i just heard all of it...I don't have anything to back it up.

 

[DaleC76]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

That probably includes money spent on previous failed incarnations of the film.

 

[serenitytrek1]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

The only reason why man of steel did so well at the box office is because the film has the Nolan name stamped on it

Superman while been familiar has never been a huge box office draw. WB did good for themselves when they decided to market the film as a Nolan film.

Chris Nolan has one of the biggest fan base in film history. Believe me,
if Nolan's name was not on Man of Steel , the film would have struggled at the box office.

 

[Belz...]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

The only reason why man of steel did so well at the box office is because the film has the Nolan name stamped on it

I'm sure it helped, but the "only" reason ? Aren't you neglecting their pretty good marketing, and the popularity of the character ?

Nolan's presence didn't contribute in my seeing it, anyway.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

The only reason why man of steel did so well at the box office is because the film has the Nolan name stamped on it

Nope.

It might shock some folks to learn that over nine out of ten people who go to the movies have no idea who produces, directs or writes a given film. There are only one or two names that are actually well-known to the majority of the general public; Nolan isn't one of them (nor, apropos of nothing, is Whedon or Bay).

The association of certain behind-the-scenes folks with a movie is enough to get the attention of fans and aficionados, which helps to promote a movie - but it's not nearly enough to draw in the audience and make a film a big hit.

Man Of Steel is a better and more accessible movie - and a lot more people give a crap about Superman than Star Trek. It's that simple.

 

[serenitytrek1]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

Believe me. man of steel did well because it has Nolan's name on it. superman returns is clearly the better film but no one cares. I just don't know, but Nolan has this thing on fan boys and I don't mean fan boys as an insult. Any film he does will be a success because he has a mighty fan boy fan base.

If Nolan did not produce MOS, there is no way the film would have been a
success at least not with all the negative reviews it got.

Also for those who say that people don't know the director or producers, I beg to differ. WB clearly had Nolan's name in all the promotions. WB would not have done so if they were not aware of the mighty fan base Nolan has.

Another perfect example is After Earth, Sony did not promote the film as a M. Night Shyamalan film. it was simply listed as a Will Smith film. Clearly, Sony did not feel comfortable with putting Shyamalan's name on the film despite the fact that he was the director.

So yeah...Directors and Producers matter a lot when it comes to a film's success.If Nolan were to direct Trek 3, the film will make at least 800 million -1 billion at the box office. Why? because the Nolan name is a powerful name.

Also does it matter? STiD is the most critical acclaimed blockbuster of the summer. Iron man 3 is behind and Man of Steel is far far behind STiD.

Its about the quality and not the quantity.

STiD, (while a lot of fans including myself did not like the rehash of WOK) STiD, still a great film.

 

[BillJ]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

Believe me. man of steel did well because it has Nolan's name on it. superman returns is clearly the better film but no one cares.

I almost didn't go see it because it had Nolan's name attached, The Dark Knight trilogy is pretty dull and meandering. Man of Steel doesn't feel like a Nolan film at all.

Tried to watch Superman Returns the other night, boy does that feel like a Nolan film. Zzzzzzzzzzzz...

 

[Belz...]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

Believe me.

No.

man of steel did well because it has Nolan's name on it.

Repeating it doesn't make it true.

superman returns is clearly the better film but no one cares.

No. People disagree with you. It's not the same thing. Why do so many people have such trouble understanding that their appreciation of a particular thing doesn't mean that objective reality corresponds with said appreciation ?

I just don't know, but Nolan has this thing on fan boys and I don't mean fan boys as an insult.

Those fan boys are a tiny minority.

If Nolan did not produce MOS, there is no way the film would have been a
success at least not with all the negative reviews it got.

You think most people who go see movies give a shit about critics ?

And yeah, as I said some people know who Nolan is, and saying "produced by the director of the Dark Knight" is going to spark interest. But it's not going to make a 200 million movie into a 500 million one by magic.

Another perfect example is After Earth, Sony did not promote the film as a M. Night Shyamalan film. it was simply listed as a Will Smith film. Clearly, Sony did not feel comfortable with putting Shyamalan's name on the film despite the fact that he was the director.

Yeah, and it really helped the movie, right ?

So yeah...Directors and Producers matter a lot when it comes to a film's success.If Nolan were to direct Trek 3, the film will make at least 800 million -1 billion at the box office. Why? because the Nolan name is a powerful name.

Also does it matter? STiD is the most critical acclaimed blockbuster of the summer. Iron man 3 is behind and Man of Steel is far far behind STiD.

Its about the quality and not the quantity.

 

[Set Harth]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

superman returns is clearly the better film but no one cares.

"I care." - Luke Skywalker

 

[M'Sharak]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

Believe me. man of steel did well because it has Nolan's name on it.

Why should anyone believe you? Support your assertion with facts, statistics and reasoning.

superman returns is clearly the better film but no one cares. I just don't know, but Nolan has this thing on fan boys and I don't mean fan boys as an insult. Any film he does will be a success because he has a mighty fan boy fan base.

You say that you don't mean "fan boys" as an insult, yet use it in insulting fashion in the very same sentence and in the sentence following. Haven't you learned by now not to do that?

 

[Kabraxal]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

After marathoning the original movies and SR the past few days, the stark difference from the first 5 films and MoS really became apparent... MoS was an action movie, while the first 5 were movies with some action in them. The focus was on the characters in the first films. The action was meant to supplement that. In MoS, the action was the point. It was basically "I want to see two kryptonians going at it all out!" and the movie was designed solely to get to that point. It's why the characterisation fell flat, most of the moments felt forced, and the whole ending sequence made no sense in regards to the Superman character. It was never really about the symbol of Superman... it was all about seeing those powers in action with someone equal to him in strength.

Probably why some have been able to enjoy the film... and It's the reason I only grow more tired of it each day. Superman II, even 30 years ago and without the tech to pull off the stunning effects, delivers a far more satisfying and true battle of Kryptonians... if only MoS had understood what Superman is all about and used those effects to enhance it instead of smother it... man it could have been an extremely special movie. I mean, you can see the potential in MoS, but it was just never realised.

 

[serenitytrek1]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

The only reason why man of steel did so well at the box office is because the film has the Nolan name stamped on it

Nope.

It might shock some folks to learn that over nine out of ten people who go to the movies have no idea who produces, directs or writes a given film. There are only one or two names that are actually well-known to the majority of the general public; Nolan isn't one of them (nor, apropos of nothing, is Whedon or Bay).

The association of certain behind-the-scenes folks with a movie is enough to get the attention of fans and aficionados, which helps to promote a movie - but it's not nearly enough to draw in the audience and make a film a big hit.

Man Of Steel is a better and more accessible movie - and a lot more people give a crap about Superman than Star Trek. It's that simple.

Believe me. man of steel did well because it has Nolan's name on it.

Why should anyone believe you? Support your assertion with facts, statistics and reasoning.

superman returns is clearly the better film but no one cares. I just don't know, but Nolan has this thing on fan boys and I don't mean fan boys as an insult. Any film he does will be a success because he has a mighty fan boy fan base.

You say that you don't mean "fan boys" as an insult, yet use it in insulting fashion in the very same sentence and in the sentence following. Haven't you learned by now not to do that?

Respectfully, I can support my opinion with facts. As I have done my research.

It is no coincidence that most of Nolan films are on IMDB's top 250. Why? because he has huge fan base. Nolan's fan base is like the twilight fan base. His films will always be successful regardless of what the critics think.

here is my back up:

http://mubi.com/topics/which-directors-have-the-worst-fanboys?page=6

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl...istopher-nolans-best-film-is-memento-20120815

http://www.angry-assholes.com/article.php?id=24

A lot of his fans also forced rotten tomatoes to shut itself down because his fans (most of them young guys and teen boys) where sending film critics death threats after they gave TDKR negative reviews. here is the link:


http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/rotten-tomatoes-and-the-wrath-of-the-fanboys.

http://www.vulture.com/2012/07/christopher-nolan-understands-his-fanboys.html


Also again , I don't mean fan boys as an insult. Most Nolan fans or just comic fans refer to themselves as fan boys. It is not an insult. However I wont use it again since it is classified as insult on this site.

As a person who has a huge and even professional background in media, entertainment and pop culture. I will say that directors and producers and even the actors matter when it comes to a film's success.

I also backed up my opinion as facts when I compared the way WB and Sony promoted and advertised their respective films: Man of Steel and After Earth.

As for those saying people don't care about the critical reception. I will say yes and no on that.

A film with an unknown director or without a solid fan base is likely suffer at the box office if it gets bad reviews.

However a film with a huge fan base like Twilight and Batman will always be bullet proof at the box office because the fans would not care what the critics think.

If anyone wants more proof or want the facts, please it is right in front of you.

The never ending debate of Star Trek vs Star Wars.

All star wars films including episode I and II have been successful at the box office even with the negative reviews and why? ...Well, Star Wars has one of he biggest fan base of all time.

As for Star Trek films?? every star trek films with negative reviews like Nemesis or Final Frontal has always flopped at the box office and why? Trek fan base while been huge in its own right is still behind the Star Wars fan base.

I can prove this as facts:

https://www.facebook.com/StarTrek.UK?fref=ts

https://www.facebook.com/StarWars.UK?fref=ts


All this things matters. If it didn't, Movie production companies like WB,FOX and Disney would have been bankrupt by now.

I can also give more of my opinions as facts by explaining why Disney chose to have Miley Cyrus and the Jonas Brothers as the face of Disney 5 or 6 years ago.

Let me just say two words: TEEN GIRLS.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

Superman Returns is far inferior to Man Of Steel. Oh, and almost no one knows or cares who Nolan is.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

If we're going to hang success on a name, I'd say there are plenty of names to go around. I seem to recall people liking 300 a lot, for example. Heck, Superman has a lot of name recognition. And, for some reason, even though he was most famous in a movie from back before the Internet, a lot of people know who Zod is.

It's also hard to dismiss marketing and advertisement, that widely disseminated exciting scenes from the movie, as factors that put butts in seats. They might even see that working and try marketing and advertising future films, through the use of exciting footage from them.

Seriously, the idea that all you need is a placard with one name on it to get people to come see a film is truly ridiculous. The "only reason"? No way.

 

[Belz...]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

In MoS, the action was the point.

No.

 

[Belz...]

Re: Why would someone avoid STID but see Iron Man & Man Of Steel? spoi

Respectfully, I can support my opinion with facts. As I have done my research.

This should be good.

It is no coincidence that most of Nolan films are on IMDB's top 250. Why? because he has huge fan base.

Wait, did you just go from observation to conclusion without the intervening steps ? Yes you did.

A lot of his fans also forced rotten tomatoes to shut itself down because his fans (most of them young guys and teen boys) where sending film critics death threats after they gave TDKR negative reviews.

What does this prove ? ONE person making a death threat or a bomb threat is enough to cause trouble. How does this fact help us assess the number of Nolan fans ?

As a person who has a huge and even professional background in media, entertainment and pop culture. I will say that directors and producers and even the actors matter when it comes to a film's success.

I didn't say it didn't matter, but that wasn't your claim, that it "mattered". You said "The only reason why man of steel did so well at the box office is because the film has the Nolan name stamped on it"

(Emphasis mine)

You made an absolute, easily-refuted statement. It was shown wrong. Now you want to move the goalposts to try and appear like you said something else.