-
-
>Henry Cavill is my new favorite Superman, and I even liked Michael Shannon's General Zod better.
I have to agree. These two did a great job, but I found a lot of the other stuff in the film kinda distracting. Zod's a pretty standard "villain who says 'BAH!'" but he was suitably boistrous and threatening. You could definitely see this dude smashing a planet.
>my biggest gripes are the terrible dialog and the poor edits between scenes
Like that. The editing bothered me a lot. There's no buildup to anything 'cos they jump back and forth through time with little framing. We don't see anything grow 'cos just as a scene is brewing up to something they cut to something completely unrelated. That's a big part of what I mean when I say it felt like stuff happening more than a story.
>This film blurred those lines between Supes and Zod.
I didn't get that at all. I felt Superman WAS Superman.... but a lot of what went on around him was different. I didn't see him as ashamed of his powers; Li'l Clark holding himself back was a standard for a long time, and him finally deciding the world needed him and taking up the Super mantle is pretty pat too. What changed was how he came to that. With Pa all twitchy about his powers they edited out one of the classic motivations for Supes: that his good ol' stereotypical 50's-esque breadbasket upbringing instilled in him a strong sense of doing the right thing, regardless. And changing Pa didn't feel like they were "dark and grittying" things up; it seemed more like an attempt to "realistic" things up by adding a reason for Li'l Clark to hold back: the idea that folks would be afraid of an all powerful extraterrestrial. But again, it's sort of just there.... it doesn't add anything, it confuses stuff that had been established since the 50's, and it adds a confounding variable that never goes anywhere. Nobody is REALLY afraid of Superman, even though stereotypical army officers 1 and 2 pay lip service to the idea. Which goes to the overwrought thing: they add circumstance that's unneccesary, and that they're unwilling to deal with.
Don C.Comment
-
Superman's greatest power is his sense of morality. I didn't get that at all. He was Superman (in uniform) for like 5 hours, and in that time he managed to:
Pretend surrender to Detective Stabler
Let Lois know hope is spelled with an S
Fly-tackle Zod through eight miles of corn
Assist in the destruction of downtown Smallville and the local Ihop along with every working motor vehicle and gas station
Destroy a Waynetech satellite
Engages in a battle in the most heavily populated city on Earth, inadvertantly causing untold billions of dollars in damage, killing 22,000 citizens, toppling 37 buildings
Breaks a fellow Kryptonian's neck ( he couldn't have just flown Zod straight up through the roof?)
Destroys a million dollar military drone
This might be the Superman our current society and moviegoing audience want, but it certainly is not the Superman I know and love. He would have done everything to protect the citizens of both Smallville and Metropolis by taking the fight somewhere else to avoid collateral damage and unnecesary loss of life. Protecting lives would take precedence over everything. At no point was he portrayed as a hero, just a alien combatant. The only acknowledgement he ever received was ,"This man is not our enemy."
This film's worldwide box office take is barely more than what the current Thor sequel has made. I realize that I'm unreasonably idealistic with this thinking, but a successful Superman movie would have a new generation of kids wearing their logo shirts pretending to save the day, not knocking over every mailbox and smashing through every dog and tree house in the neighborhood while pretending to snap their cousin Logan's neck.I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she dumped me before we met.
If anyone here believes in psychokinesis, please raise my hand.Comment
-
You must try to generate happiness within yourself. If you aren't happy in one place, chances are you won't be happy anyplace. -Ernie BanksComment
-
>At no point was he portrayed as a hero, just a alien combatant.
I was thinkin' on this, and for me it seems like people were bothered by the wrong stuff. Best example: Supes killing Zod. Cheesed off a LOT of folks. "Superman DOESN'T kill!"
The biggest problem with Supes is challenging him. He's invulerable, super strong, has ALL the powers, no moral failings.... The end of this flick provided an ACTUAL challenge for him; does he go against one of his core beliefs for the sake of innocents? It's a no-win and ultimately he errors on the side of others. He didn't do so casually. They made it abundantly clear that killing Zod was traumatic for him. It's something he'll have to live with for the rest of his life, and he did it for others. THAT'S a hero; someone who takes the heat for everyone else. The BS fight doesn't make him a hero. "OH NOES! Superman is fighting someone as strong as he is! Will he win?!?!" Spoilers: yes. He ALWAYS does. Mostly 'cos if he doesn't the world is destoyed and that limits chances for a sequel.
It also provides a nice contrast to every other action hero out there who kills with impunity. (Sometimes even bystanders; I'm looking at you "Commando" and "Matrix.") Taking a life affected him. It was demonstrated as a bad thing. I think the end of that fight is the first time we've seen Superman defeated ANYWHERE. It's one of the few times I've seen the consequences of a fight scene dealt with too. And an extra, unexpected bit: it hilights the connection between Superman and Lois. At his hour of need, she was there for him. She's not following him just 'cos he's so hunky. There's something more to it. She sees him at his worst, and she accepts him for it. And for Supes it provides some much needed support; which helps humanize him. He's not invulnerable, he can make mistakes, and he still needs people.
So yeah; the part that seems to have bothered folks the most for me was one of the better things about the film. (I might have had Zod actually fry up a few bystanders to put more of a sense of urgency to the scene, but that's me.) What I think people SHOULD have been bothered by was LOIS killing so many people. Superman taking a life was handled with the gravity it should have been. Superman himself felt right; but everything ELSE felt like standard action movie stuff. Like Lois shooting a guy in the face. Action heroes do that all the time; we're used to it.
>Engages in a battle in the most heavily populated city on Earth, inadvertantly causing untold billions of dollars in damage, killing 22,000 citizens, toppling 37 buildings
Like that. From the outcry over the damage I was expecting something MUCH worse. What I saw in this film was the same stuff I've seen in durned near every other superhero film. Almost frame by frame, really. I don't know why Avengers gets a pass and Superman doesn't. Except maybe the "get everyone out of here" bit of lip service from Cap.... and even THEN a few minutes later we see a cyber space-whale plow through a building as an office full of people above watch. (People who are now, in all likelihood dead.) MAYBE Supes could have lured them away, but Metropolis was where the fight was and the baddies had already made it clear they were intent on murder. Just like the aliens from Avengers. (JUST LIKE the aliens.... right down to their finish.... "Quick! Use the Vague McGuffin to suck them all into limbo!")
Don't get me wrong; I didn't think it was a very good movie, but I didn't see it as that much worse than other films the folks who hated "Man of Steel" loved.
Don C.Comment
-
When it gets down to it, was Man of Steel a fun movie to watch? It was not for many people. Thats where it fails. Even if Superman II could have been written better in some ways, it was still fun to watch. (This is my opinion, of course)
Thats why I think the Marvel movies are so much better to many people than DCs offerings. They manage to balance the fun with the serious.Comment
-
I think some of the issues with the film's portrayal of Superman are that we who came to the character through comics, came to an already developed Superman upon our first reading because the character had been around for 25 to 35 years. Even in the George Reeves TV series, Superman was who he was from the outset. In the Donner film, Jor-El trained him for a dozen years to be Superman, and when he flies away from the Fortress he's Superman.
Byrne's reintroduction of the character, pretty much had him emerge from whole cloth too, with the moral upbringing of the Kent's explaining his near perfection.
It seems Snyder and Goyer are attempting show a Superman who is developing into who he will ultimately be. a superman brought up by moral parents but hyper-protective parents.
Again, as Don points out, a lot of this is lip service, but so much of the development in comics is mere lip service, too.
one of the great maybe even genius ideas in Spider-Man's origin is the karmic aspect of the crook Peter wouldn't stop out of animosity for it not being his "job" ends up killing Uncle Ben. That mistake or selfish decision changed the character forever.
Maybe Zod's death will do the same for Superman in future films with MOS.
As for Clark tearing up the truck, that's really a throwback to the early golden age when the character wasn't a Boy Scout. He would do super pranks on foes and friends. That aspect faded early on, but it is there. And sure it is a maturity issue, too.
I liked the movie as an alternative view at Superman. It wasn't perfect by any means and I do wish there had been more fun and to it. But I much prefer it to Superman Returns, although that film did contain a lot of cool parts.
I think the reason the Avengers didn't get tagged like MOS for all the destruction had to do with the lighter tone of the Avengers and also the expectation for Superman to be precision perfect by fans.
It's funny that one of the biggest gripes about Superman is that he's too good, too perfect and too powerful, but when the character is presented in a bit lesser light, it draws criticism, too.
That just shows how difficult it is to please fans and the general public with the character. Every note has to be pitch perfect to please. It seems the Marvel characters and even Batman have a lot more leeway among critics and fans.Last edited by madmarva; Dec 7, '13, 2:36 PM.Comment
-
>was Man of Steel a fun movie to watch? It was not for many people.
>I am so tired of Epic.
When discussing it with folks around here a LOT of them find it totally unmemorable. "Did I see that?" kind of stuff. A friend of mine thinks it's because it's so much like every other superhero film. I felt that way too; especially the big fight at the end. I actually found myself wishing it was over so they could get back to the story.
>That just shows how difficult it is to please fans and the general public with the character. Every note has to be pitch perfect to please.
Yeah.... I think when it comes to the nerdly arts; ESPECIALLY nerd rage.... the audience is the big factor. Thing is, I'm often at a loss as to why they like one thing voer another; especially if they REALLY like or hate something. It's tough for me to empathize 'cos for the last decade or so I've found most entertainment hovers around the "meh" line: the good stuff isn't that good, the bad not that bad. It's all sort of there.
>I think the reason the Avengers didn't get tagged like MOS for all the destruction had to do with the lighter tone of the Avengers
It's a good point, but there are some confounding variables. Avengers has some pretty harsh stuff going on. They outright murder the hapless sidekick for one.... but folks saw that as part of the story, and not "those horrible people are trying to gritty it up 'cos they're bad and hate fun!" It's where people draw that line I find so fascinating.
>As for Clark tearing up the truck, that's really a throwback to the early golden age when the character wasn't a Boy Scout.
Like that. I thought the scene harkened back to "Superman II" (which MOS borrowed from A LOT) where Supes gets his powers back and straight up assaults the guy in the bar, instead of mangling his truck. A scene I'd consider a LOT worse than the truck one 'cos it's an action against the person directly, and the truck was done in frustration and hot blood; Supes had to THINK about the guy from "Superman II" and PLAN to go back and give him what's what. But how many other people would draw the line there?
Don C.Comment
-
Don, the truck scene is a callback to Superman II. MOS is a remake or reimagining of Superman II, but in his early appearances Superman wasn't above kicking sand in the face of bullies and thugs. The series had a bit more wish fulfillment that was later rendered out of the strip. He would occasionally lower himself to meet out Justice.
As for the destruction, in the comics it's almost always made a point that Superman is going to do whatever he can to take the fight away from people and it was reinforced in Superman II, but the same expectation hasn't been set with the Avengers. It's not as much a part of their character. Plus, the Avengers weren't the cause of the invasion, while in MOS his use of the key and spaceship drew Zod and his cronies to Earth.
I also believe the destruction and Superman's involvement in it was a clear choice made by Snyder and Goyer because it does deviate from Superman II, which they were basically remaking. Goyer has said it would be addressed in the sequel, if of course it's not squeezed out at some point by a cameo of some 3rd tier JLAer.
I'm interested I seeing where they take Superman and what there choices are, but I also understand why this version of Superman irritates so many or is just uninteresting to them.Last edited by madmarva; Dec 8, '13, 11:40 AM.Comment
-
I was just watching a few episodes of Superman (the classic show). I noticed in the first season he could be pretty tough. Theres one episode (im going from memory, cant find it yet) where a couple of people learn his identity and he LEAVES them on top of a mountain at the end of the episode, lol.
Youtube has a few episodes, btw. This is the first time I've noticed it.
Comment
-
Comment
-
^^^ No, they were both idiots and tried to climb down off the mountain, the woman in heels.You must try to generate happiness within yourself. If you aren't happy in one place, chances are you won't be happy anyplace. -Ernie BanksComment
-
The first season of Superman is really pretty good. Love The War on Crime and wrestling episode.Comment
Tweet
Comment