Man of Steel review - WITH SPOILERS

[palitoy]

The "Half in the Bag" guys review the movie. Warning: adult language

http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-man-of-steel/

Cool, I usually respect these guys, even when I don't agree. They DESTROYED the latest Star Trek movie but at the end of the day still said it was fun to watch.

[Sideshow Spock]

Cool, I usually respect these guys, even when I don't agree. They DESTROYED the latest Star Trek movie but at the end of the day still said it was fun to watch.

Yeah, I really haven't watched that much of their stuff, so I was taken aback by the brutality of their Trek review. Not so much this time around . I agree that while I think they are incredibly harsh, they often make some excellent points and observations.

[hedrap]

The "Half in the Bag" guys review the movie. Warning: adult language

http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-man-of-steel/

They have some good points that we've all discussed, but for the most part, it's a thrashing based on their idea as to what Superman should be, which is everything from George Reeves to Lois & Clark, except starting with Superman Animated, that tone changed. MOS is very similar to Smallville, except the time crunch kills some important character development in MOS and the TV format extends ideas and plot points in Smallville that should be resolved in one season, but go on for years.

I've said for over a decade if WB simply followed the pilot for Superman: Animated, people would love it as a live action film. But, WB held this deep reservation about using Paul Dini, so now he's pretty much with Marvel.

[Earth 2 Chris]

Parts of MOS seemed influenced by STAS, particularly the opening on Krypton with the more action-oriented Jor-El.

Basically WB could adapt ANY of the Timmverse stuff into life-action, and it would work.

Chris

[madmarva]

Chris, I understand your frustration, but in a way I think it's good. Some are saying the movie is bad, but more are discussing it like very few films ever get discussed, and people are still going to see it and I think folks will eat it up on DVD. I think it shows there is great interest and care about the character, which couldn't be said after Superman Returns.

I know people discussing this movie whom I've known for years and never heard talk about any movie until now.

If Warners comes back with a film that addresses the destruction and Zod being killed and serves up a product with fewer gaps in logic, I think they will have another hit. And this movie is a hit.

The biggest complaint outside of the differences from the Donner flick - which I think will grow on audiences - is it was too intense. That's better than being called dull or boring, and better yet it's an easy fix.

Most of the people complaining about it have parts of the film they enjoyed, and Cavil has generally been accepted as the character.

If Warmers comes back with a killer take on Luthor, really work out how Lois being in on the secret is an advantage and disadvantage and provide Superman a threat to punch in a more responsible manner, I could see the franchise continue to grow.

[Earth 2 Chris]

^Good points. I guess any talk is better than a collective "meh" like Returns seemed to have.

Chris

[ScottA]

I saw it last night finally. I really enjoyed it and that's all that matters.

[hedrap]

If Warners comes back with a film that addresses the destruction and Zod being killed and serves up a product with fewer gaps in logic, I think they will have another hit. And this movie is a hit.


If Warners comes back with a killer take on Luthor, really work out how Lois being in on the secret is an advantage and disadvantage and provide Superman a threat to punch in a more responsible manner, I could see the franchise continue to grow.

It's waaay too easy to write a sequel that gets caught up in trying to refute the critics.

For example, Goyer knows why Lois was on the military bomber at the end because in the earlier scripts, Meloni's character was her dad, Sam Lane. It's why she got access to everything, but at some point it was changed. It could be for a dozen different reasons, but someone obviously didn't go through and really study what that change meant. Now apply that to all the discrepancies, and I bet Goyer and Snyder have broken computers after reading the litany of complaints.

But they put themselves in this position, and if they do what needs to be done, really address the implications of the cause/effect in MOS, you're looking at something just as heavy as MOS in tone, which is one of the big complaints. That's where I think WB will put on the brakes and bring in someone else, or make them move on to World's Finest and ignore the ramifications of MOS.

It's crazy because Nolan, or his brother, has to get more involved but all talk before release was the opposite. Without him reassuring WB, they'll go into panic mode just like Marvel did after Norton's Hulk.

[madmarva]

I think the destruction can be addressed and still ease up on the intensity. Adding the dynamics between Lois and Clark as co-workers is one way to do it. Heck if Snyder had just been a little more judicious in cutting the destruction scenes, I think the film would play better.

If you are making a franchise, you want to please, but you also want to leave the audience wanting more rather than feeling worn out. And I think beyond all the nerdy nitpicking of big fans like myself, that's the movie's only unforgivable fault, that fans got too much destruction, not necessarily too much action. The gaps in logic fly by most movie goers just like in every other popular action film.

And again, this movie is a hit. It's not a blockbuster on the lines or Dark Knight or Avengers, but those films had the advantage of adding audience from the films prior to them.

If Warners doesn't push on, it's a foolish move and a waste of the investment it made. But, it is a ton of money and green Lantern did bite them on the butt.

[Earth 2 Chris]

I think the complaints about Superman Returns weighed heavily on the creators minds, thus the almost non-stop action, and destruction. Everyone wanted to see Superman punch something...and we got it. The case can be made they went a bit overboard. I'm hearing people saying "we never saw Superman save anyone". Well, what about that oil rig? The school bus? Yes, there wasn't much saving in Metropolis, but again, we saw empty buildings. We saw a few errant people, like the family in the train station. As the guys said on the Superman Homepage review, movies' are a visual medium. Since we didn't see countless bodies or any more people running, it sure looks like the city was essentially empty by the time the final Superman/Zod fight begins. Now does that make sense...maybe not. But I think a lot of the complaints are based on assumptions of things we just didn't see. Maybe that was sloppy movie-making or editing to not forsee people's reactions, but given what the filmmakers showed us, Superman fought Zod in a city that was already partially destroyed by the world engine, and nearly abandoned, or at least the immediate downtown area seemed to be.

Chris

[Operation:Mego]

"We almost destroyed the world last time," director Zack Snyder says. "Now what!?"

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2013/06/27/man-of-steel-sequel-zack-snyder/

He also mentions Luthor and Kryptonite as well as wanting to expand their universe to include other DC characters.

[hedrap]

I think the destruction can be addressed and still ease up on the intensity. Adding the dynamics between Lois and Clark as co-workers is one way to do it. Heck if Snyder had just been a little more judicious in cutting the destruction scenes, I think the film would play better.

Towards the end, my wife said "oh, Lois and Clark are going to be Mulder and Scully".

I never consider that, but it fits the mystery sci-fi tone, and another Smallville thread.

The more I think about, the more I realize how influenced these guy were by Smallville, but can't say so after Millar and Gough sued WB.
, but

[Operation:Mego]

[Operation:Mego]

Speaking to Fox Business Channel, Grae Drake, editor of Rotten Tomatoes, expressed dismay over the critical reception, saying “As much as I love and respect our critics at Rotten Tomatoes, I’ve got to say I am shocked. Listen, the movie’s not perfect but…I just cannot fathom it. It was a good movie, you guys.”

[huedell]

I just saw this awesome video on youtube from the writer of Chronicle. He has an interesting view on Man of Steel and current superhero movies in general. His opinion on the film pretty much mirrors my own. Don't watch this at work or around your kids as it has bad words in it. I think he's a little rough on Peter Parker when talks about Spider-man but otherwise I agree with him on everything else. I like character driven stories over action/plot driven stories. It's why I liked Donner's Superman way better. Heck, I like Superman Returns better for the same reason and that movie was all kinds of screwed up.

Let's put the Hero back in Superhero is his point and I agree %100.

“Dark and tortured” and “Superman” never belong in the same sentence, unless that sentence is “Superman met his dark and tortured friend Batman for coffee.”

In the context of the Museum boards and my feelings on Superman, this writer and YOU boynightwing (for posting the link in this thread) are my heroes.

THIS is how to speak on the greatness of the Superman character as far as I'm concerned.